Talk:The Stig

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Stig article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
Archive
Archives
1


Contents

[edit] Infobox

I don't feel the first infobox is really necessary or encyclopedic. "Birth date = unknown" and "occupation = tame racing driver" come across as in-universe jokes rather than genuine informative descriptions. None of the other fields in the infobox will ever be filled, rendering it useless. This should simply be replaced by the picture. Zunaid©Please rate me at Editor Review! 08:39, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Now we've got a potential edit-war over the added "birthplace". How can we possibly determine where he was born if we don't know who he is? I've seen two editors insist there have been "references" to his being an Englishman, and have thus in a burst of nationalism, decided he was born in England while inserting/restoring the entry. And that's fine if we have reliable sources that can a. document that the references took place; b. demonstrate that the references on the show were truthful and not another of a long line of evasions designed to throw us off the Stig's identity and c. that The Stig is even one person born in England. As it stands, I have again reverted the unsupported listing of his birthplace and suggested the issue be discussed toward consensus here. Drmargi (talk) 18:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

First off, I invite you to withdraw your "thus in a burst of nationalism" comment - I find it rude and presumptuous. For the record I am not English. Answering your points:
a. there are many many episodes where he has been described as "English" - a few references to the episode number will suffice in my opinion. In a edit summary you seemed to suggest that anybody could become English. In my edit summary I pointed out that while anyone (in theory) could get a British passport and become British, there is no way to acquire English nationality except to be born there.
b. You're veering off into original research there. How are any of us to interpret what is said? I got slapped down for challenging the credit of "presenter" to the Stig on the Top Gear article. The consensus seems to be, whatever is stated by the show is to be taken on faith.
c. "that The Stig is even one person born in England" makes no sense. We are talking about the character here, not the "actor" under the suit. It's pretty widely thought now that several people play The Stig, but let's assume we found out who did what. What would you like to see in the infbox? 60% English, 10% Swedish, 10%.... ? Mark83 (talk) 21:02, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I accept that you're not English. But the comment reflects the POV imbedded in your edit summaries, and as such is relevant. But back to the points you make in return:
a. You've misunderstood the edit summary to which you refer. I said "reference to his being an Englishman does not mean we know he was born in England" what I meant was the fact someone on the show says he was born in England doesn't make it so. We get evasion after evasion from Clarkson alone. When you reverted a reasonably supported edit, I got a sarcastic response giving me a lesson in British citizenship that was unnecessary and off-point. Regardless, casual remarks about The Stig are dicey sources at best, but could have been referenced had this been the only issue.
b. I'm actually avoiding original research by standing by the need for reliable sources. On a British show with three English hosts, referring to The Stig as English (whether formally or informally) isn't terribly surprising. Nor is it terribly meaningful. You can take faith just so far, especially given your third point.
c. If The Stig is a character, he wasn't born at all, and the birthplace business is less important. The line between person and character is routinely blurred, to the point we can't always be sure to which we are attending. That alone makes determination of a birthplace even more difficult if not downright impossible. The rest, the suggestion I'm proposing fragmenting his nationality is absurd and a touch petulant. It doesn't merit any further response.
I stand by my position we have not approached the standard of evidence needed to declare The Stig as having been born in England. In fact, to my eyes (as an academic used to working with positions supported by evidence) you've weakened, not strengthened your case. I have yet to see anything solid evidencing that The Stig was born in England to an encyclopedic standard. Drmargi (talk) 23:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
"But the comment reflects the POV imbedded in your edit summaries" - what POV is that?
a. I did not make a "a sarcastic response giving me a lesson in British citizenship that was unnecessary and off-point" - I believed that you were saying anybody could apply for English citizenship. There is a common misunderstanding of the relative meanings of Britain/Great Britain/UK and the relative meaning of English/Scottis/Welsh/Northern Irish. I can see from your elaboration here that is not what you meant, however I was making a genuine response. Your interpretation of sarcasm is erroneous and, with due respect, assumes the worst of my intentions.
b. No, I'm sorry - "On a British show with three English hosts, referring to The Stig as English (whether formally or informally) isn't terribly surprising." - So what are you saying. There's every chance he's Australian, American or French... but the host's have a natural bias to lie about it? If that is not OR I don't know what is.
c. Characters can have birthplaces. As for the fragmented nationality, I will admit that was facetious (to make a point). Your "petulant" comment is the third, by my count, example of you assuming the worst in my intentions. I have taken considerable time to respond here in a constructive way. Perhaps you could recognise that and stick to commenting on the issue rather than other user(s). Mark83 (talk) 22:54, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Series or Season?

Minor point: should we use the term series or season? The body of the article uses "series", while the refs use "season". I prefer season, but either way the usage should be consistent. Zunaid©Please rate me at Editor Review! 08:39, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Isn't season more of an Americanism? Since this is a UK show, I'd use series.
Series would be the proper term to use for Top Gear-related articles, as that's what it's always referred to as, never season. NeilSenna 23:21, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Stig revealed?

According to [[1]], this guy is the stig, and has been announced as such. Maybe someone with more knowledge should check this up? Mouse Nightshirt 00:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

That article is about Perry McCarthy, who was indeed the first (black) Stig, and is already mentioned in the article as such. Zunaid©Review me! 07:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rewrite of 10 January 2007

I'm not sure that the addition of all the extra info necessarily improves the article. WP:WAF favours writing articles in an out-of-universe style. In-universe sections are mainly to provide "internal" context and should be kept brief and terse. This would include things such as the black/white Stig succession. The article should concentrate more on the "real-world" context of the show, such as the comparison to real-world racing drivers, and not delve too deeply "in-universe", such as overly quoting in-universe jokes and detailing every aspect of The Stig's action within the show itself. Zunaid©® 07:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

And how do you favor describing The Stig, when all the hosts and Top Gear have done is either mention him as some superior being, keeping his real identity a secret, and ambigiously hinting towards the F1 drivers as being The Stig? He's a "ficticious character." You can't make him real no matter how you cut it.--293.xx.xxx.xx 10:09, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

And I find offense in your useage of my username to title your scathing comments. Please edit it post haste.--293.xx.xxx.xx 10:11, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Scathing? Seriously? I thought I was being quite neutral and purely descriptive. But anyway, I've changed the title. Back to the discussion: the distinction between in- and out-of-universe is quite easy to maintain. Compare: "During different seasons of the show the Stig would listen to many different genres of music..." vs. "The Stig likes listening to a variety of music". The first sentence puts the statement in a real world context, the second is a statement about the Stig as if he were a real person rather than a fictional character. To my mind, and according to WAF, the first phrasing is preferred and more "encyclopedic". The second phrasing sounds too much like fan-fiction. Anyway, I think other editors should jump in at this point, else we won't reach a consensus. Zunaid©® 07:35, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Bit late here, but I think the new, slimmer article looks much better than it did a month ago. A great example of how getting rid of the 'in-universe' stuff can improve an article. --Gavinio 11:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

But the thing is, there is alot of "in universe" stuff compared to the real world stuff. What about fictioal characters? They have profiles. Why not the Stig? He is a fantastic idea for a family prime-time show. I think that in universe accounts of the Stig should be allowed. mattmaloneypresents 11:41, 27 May 2007 (GMT)

[edit] Julian Bailey as the Stig?

I remember reading an interview with McCarthy on Crash.net, where he said that someone stood in for him once. I think it was Bailey. The Crash.net page is down. Anyone know who it was? Damiancorrigan 00:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The statement that is currently in the article is true. The Daily Express did report that the Stig was Julian Bailey. However, their website archive is open to subscribers only. There is a scanned copy of the article floating around on the web, but it would violate fair-use to upload the image, and the website hosting the scanned article may be violating copyright (and is probably not a reliable source) so even linking to it as a source would be questionable. Zunaid©® 12:00, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Jamie Green is the stig. That 'baby spice' kid was on the prog and she said something about 'Jamie Green' helping her out with some lessons. Clarkson's face froze for an instant, then the conversation went on. There was no way they'd edit that out because it would give the game away. That's why I believe he is the Stig. TheTurk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.97.217.218 (talk) 21:02, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sabine Schmitz as the Stig?

I was just wondering, on 2 occasions, a German women drove around the nurburgring at an amazingly fast pace. Could it be possible she could be the stig? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.110.164.88 (talk) 12:10, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I assume you're talking about Sabine Schmitz. Unlikely that she's the Stig, as the Stig spoke with a male, English-accented voice to Dutch TV, has shortish dark hair (Sabine has longish blonde hair) and the Stig does not appear to have lady bumps. Sabine has her own car show in Germany, so probably wouldn't have the time. Having said that, she could drive me down to the pub any day of the week - I'd even pay the petrol money. TrulyBlue (talk) 17:11, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Really unlikely as she drives against him in Supercar Showdown. Kuyper (talk) 22:18, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ben Collins

Ben Collins is the most current regular stig. Fact. I have met him and know this for a fact! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfielding2000 (talk • contribs) 10:40, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Why the lines which mentioned that Ben Collins is the Stig were erased?? Isn't it credible?

No references = removal from article. --293.xx.xxx.xx 11:39, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes there is. If you go to Ben Collins' page theres a thing about a Newzealand magasine. I think it should go in. mattmaloneypresents 08:43, 28 May 2007

The reference was not put on the article, and someone keeps putting a paragraph to the effect of "I was there, I saw him" in. That may be, but unfortunately an individual just saying something on Wikipedia isn't strong enough - we need someone with a reputation (and therefore a reputation to lose) to give an authoritative statement.TrulyBlue 07:45, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Further to this, the paragraph that keeps being put back (by various anon users) states that on this basis Collins is the "main" Stig and there are other "minor" Stigs. Even if the person did see Collins putting on the Stig suit and was authoritative, the statement could only go as far as Collins being the Stig for that one event. From memory the photos showing the Stig at that event had him in some fairly distinctive shoes - budding investigators would do well to look at other photos to see if there is anyone wearing the same shoes, but it still wouldn't really say who plays him regularly (if there is a regular)... Halsteadk 08:49, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Sky Sports's coverage of the 24hr Britcar race at Silverstone on 9/12/07 stated that The Stig has raced in both Formula 3 and ASCAR. Ben Collins is the only driver I am aware of that fulfils that criteria. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.195.253.62 (talk) 11:47, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

In the health safety executives report into the accident involving richard hammond and the 300mph "Vampire" (20th September 2006). On page 5 (section 37) It has been quoted: "The jet car feature was considered to be sufficiently unusual and hazardous for GW to ask BC (Ben Collins), who worked closely with Top Gear as a high performance driver and consultant, to go and see PTLE and Vampire, and to prepare a briefing for RH. It was felt that, with his extensive motor sport experience, he would be able to confirm PTLE’s competence and the quality of their equipment" Reference: http://www.hse.gov.uk/foi/releases/richardhammond.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.34.187.175 (talk) 14:13, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jimmy Carr

I was in the audience at Jimmy Carrs latest live show, Gag Reflex, and when questioned by an audience member saying "Who's the stig?" he replied instantly saying, "Perry McCarthy was the first, and now the just switch between 2 different rally drivers". He then went on to say "Yeah BBC got me to sign a secrecy contract, but I'm with Channel 4". I thought I should tell you all this, I wont edit the article myself though. 86.0.244.70 11:56, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

First-hand reports are not considered reliable sources for the purposes of verifying statements. To this end, if his statement was documented in a reliable source (transcript perhaps?) it would be usable in the article. Zunaid©® 12:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I also went to see Jimmy Carr on his latest tour. I saw him in Brighton, whether this was the same gig as the guy above I'm not sure, but someone asked the same question, to which he replied that one of them was Damon Hill, but indeed that the first stig was Perry McCarthy. He also eluded to the secrecy contract 88.111.117.135 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 'American Stig'

I've just watched an episode of Top Gear on TV (Sunday 11th February 2007) where they went on a road trip in America. In this episode, the Stig was featured as "the Stig's American cousin", who was identical to the white Stig apart from his bulging midriff, which looked to be due to padding - the pun obviously being that Americans are stereotyped as being obese. Just thought you'd like to know to put it in somewhere. --Liamshaw 21:35, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

the american stig was called "fat stig" if i remember corectly. i find it amusing that i was warned for "vandalism",when i truly was correcting the page.

the american stig WAS in fact called "fat stig" (and "big stig" too). I don't get why someone removed my change where I mentioned this fact. I am putting it back.

Big Stig was uttered first by Hammond after the reveal (18 minutes in), Clarkson then utters Big Stig during the Camaro Run urging him to lean his weight in (18:44), Clarkson again utters Big Stig during the Caddy run (20:05), Hammond then notes Stig was Big (21:19), and then Hammond utters Fat Stig after the finale of the runs (21:27). Going with the first utterance.--293.xx.xxx.xx 09:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why "The Stig?"

Just was curious--I don't know enough British slang to know what it means, or where the term "The Stig" comes from. Is it from slang, or from someone's name, etc.? Anyone know? Thanks 162.83.83.83 00:33, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

It comes from Jeremy Clarkson's days in private school where presumably he or one of his friends had the nickname 'Stig'. The name itself comes from the children's book Stig of the Dump Matt7895 16:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I thought it came from Clarksons days at school and whenever there was a new sudent they'd be called "The Stig". mattmaloneypresents 10:05 27 May 2007 (GMT)
I think its British public school slang. I went to a different public school other than Repton, and new guys in their first year were called stigs there too. 84.9.32.215 06:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

"Stig" is a fairly common Swedish first name... Allan Akbar (talk) 02:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I thought it was after Stig Blomqvist, a very succesful, retired Swedish racing driver. Neıl ☎ 15:40, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Stig Introductions

I've been trying to add The Stig's introductions to The Stig page but when I add them a few minutes afterwards they're deleted. I'm not too clear on referances and dates for these so if someone could give me a hand I would be greatful. mattmaloneypresents 10:14 27 May 2007 (GMT)

The introductions fall under the "indiscriminate information" clause at WP:NOT, which I am guessing is why it is being removed. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 09:19, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

So, would it be suitable for inclusion in Wikiquote? It is still suitable information, they're still a referance to The Stig. mattmaloneypresents 10:36, 27 May 2007 (GMT)

So here is the table put into the article. I'm sorry, but IMHO, it looks like clutter and is best suited for wikiquote. --293.xx.xxx.xx 07:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure your "HO" speaks for the majority of users who may find this table interesting, informative (dare one say "encyclopaedic")?
In My Honest Opinion. IMHO. So frankly, i'm not speaking for the majority, just for myself. --293.xx.xxx.xx 19:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Well then (frankly), thanks for revealing the underlying problem with your edit. You 'speak' for yourself, but your actions affect the majority. That might not be your right or responsibility. If it is just your opinion, then why not reinstate the table and see if other people think it only adds "clutter" to the article? Of course, even if one or two do, that doesn't mean that many others haven't derived enjoyment and information from the table.

First off, --~~~~ add this to the ends of your comments. Secondly, by bringing it here, the matter can be debated and talked upon first. As is, it is cruft, and would turn it into a litteral Trivia Section. We had a previous version of this (which i'm having a hard time finding in the history) that became out of control and eventually got shunted to Wikiquote. This is almost mirroring it, and better to cut it off at the pass and have it shunted to wikiquote.--293.xx.xxx.xx 06:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Who says that it is better to "cut it off at the pass"? The complete list I posted has not become "a litteral Trivia Section" - (by the way, what is a "litteral"?). Perhaps you should wait until the effect you are anticipating happens? Remember that "almost mirroring it" is not the same as "mirroring it". Perhaps it has been done correctly this time and won't go "out of control"? I'd be interested to find out about your definition of "out of control".
Many pages have tables that present complete sets of data in table form. The matter can't easily be debated by the vast majority of people as they can't see the table to start with. Currently, a whole heap of people are missing out on seeing the table - and that is because you don't like "clutter".
Have you acknowledged the point about the discrepancy between "speaking for yourself" and "acting for the majority"? Why do you feel that you know best?
How about we put the table back for a week and see how many people complain about it? The table does no harm on this page, and potentially adds enjoyment to the people who read the page.
I choose not to put the --~~~~. It is not useful when posting anonymously (my right), as IP addresses can change between editing sessions.
I'm personally surprised the list of introductions isn't on the page - why shunt it anywhere. It's not like there is an enormous amount of information about him making the page excessively long, and the list of amusing intros is probably one of the main reasons for coming to this page. Seconary to finding out his identity, I guess. I have no commented on this page before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.189.236.142 (talk) 17:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Extensive table of quotes commented out. Click "edit" to view. Zunaid©® 15:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Something tells me we've had this debate before. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Just because something is true does not mean that it belongs in an article. This type of info belongs in Wikiquote (and it is ALREADY there. AND it's referenced from this article), which was designed for the very purpose of capturing quotes such as this extensive list. Don't confuse or unnecessarily overlap the two projects. Having this amount of quotes in the article detracts and distracts from the other content. Anon, you will have to find more people to support your view, coupled to a very good argument why this shouldn't just be left at Wikiquote, in order to establish consensus. Zunaid©® 15:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
The worth of your response would depend on your definition of "indiscriminate".
Could you please point out the reference to the concise information as I've presented it? If you're referring to the fact that the quotes are contained scattered throughout over 3,000 lines of other quotes, then I think you've found the best argument for "having this amount of quotes in the article detracts and distracts from the other content". It certainly is very difficult to locate comments introducing The Stig.
Thanks for providing the "very good argument".
All it means is that we need to organise the Wikiquote article into a more reader-friendly form. Your table of quotes would probably help very much in this regard. As for "the definition of indiscriminate" and whether to include them in this article, the consensus amongst several experienced editors (myself, 293, PS2) is that this info IS indiscriminate and should be left out. If you'd like an outside opinion, first step would be to request for comments from other editors. Zunaid©® 07:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
The quotes are still there...I really think we need to come to some sort of agreement as I tried taking them out earlier and got reverted. And all but 2 of them are on wikiquote anyway Agent452 21:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Health and Safety Executive Report debate

The entry as it appeared originally:

In the Health and Safety Executive report into the accident of Richard Hammond. Ben Collins was named as a person "who worked closely with Top Gear as a high performance driver and consultant," <ref>{{cite web |work=http://www.hse.gov.uk/foi/releases/richardhammond.pdf | title=HSE Report into the Hammond crash | url=http://www.hse.gov.uk/foi/releases/richardhammond.pdf | accessdate=2007-06-23}}</ref>

I went thru the report, and i'm finding hard to give it some credibility that it could be ambiguously pointing Collins as The Stig, or outright points Collins as The Stig. It's a goverment report, and barring cospiracy theories, why doesn't the report mention outright that Collins is the Stig or describes his job more throughly? Surely a fact like that wouldn't be purposely omitted from the report. Another arguement that could be raised is that Collins role may not be The Stig, rather a "consultant" in some other capacity that doesn't require him to don on Stiggy's White Helmet and Overalls. Seeing the antics of Clarkson whipping 6-figure supercars on the test track probably would require more than a safety officer and nervous reps from the car companies.--293.xx.xxx.xx 00:13, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I just looked at the Ben Collins article out of curiosity, and it says he's appeared *as himself* (onscreen, no helmet, doing various things, credited) in a few episodes. Though this doesn't discount him from being Stig, it's a perfectly valid explanation for why he may be assisting with some other item such as the Vampire run. Perhaps he would have appeared onscreen as a safety consultant and someone who knows his stuff when it comes to dangerous fast cars (e.g. oval racing). After all, why would the Stig have been involved with the jet car segment? That was supposed to have been Hammond's baby, his appearance would have been nonsensical. 82.46.180.56 (talk) 12:42, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Are you kidding? "why doesn't the report mention outright that Collins is the Stig or describes his job more throughly?" Why should it? Reports from bodies like this are by their nature formal - and "the stig" is nothing near an "official" name. I note with interest you focus on the "consultant" element and what other role he could possibly have and totally ignore the "high performance driver" part.Mark83 01:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Look at the second reasoning I put up. Someone else can argue that Collins role in Top Gear would be a "consultant" format, where Collins would oversee Clarkson's erratic driving. The job description given in the report is completely ambiguous, and even if the job description does list it as "high performance driver" the fact the exact role of his job is not further explained leaves it completely open to speculation. Yes, he could be The Stig, but it also leaves open several other arguements. Plus, i'm begining to wonder if that statement is about ready to violate Wikipedia:No original research guidelines. I'm willing to give it a chance because hell, The Stig's aura includes the speculation part, but as is, it's a 1/3 shot at best. --293.xx.xxx.xx 05:34, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm with you on that 293. Just because he's mentioned in whatever context (I haven't read the report) it doesn't mean he's the Stig by any means. Not saying he's definitely not, but it's nowhere near conclusive enough and I don't think it's worth mentioning, Wikipedia doesn't strike me as the place for speculation.--Santahul 22:49, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, seriously, either the report says Ben Collins is The Stig, or a notation must me made that the report is completely ambiguous and doesn't make the fact that Ben Collins is the Stig. Honestly, the mention of the report is almost bordering on Original Research, but i'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt.--293.xx.xxx.xx 10:22, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

In a motoring programme that, let's face it, mainly deals with high performance cars, I find it easily conceivable that they employ numerous high performance drivers or consultants, and that the Stig is one (or, more realistically, several) of these. I don't believe that every bit of film we see is of the three presenters driving, it doesn't need to be frankly, indeed Clarkson has said in one of his articles that the Stig drove the Bugatti Veyron on the slow return trip after the race, which is when most of the arty shots were filmed. If he drove it then, it is quite believable that other high performance drivers are used at other times when it isn't possible or necessary to see the presenter's face. So what I'm getting at, is that this statement just says that a high performance motoring show has employed a high performance driver/consultant - not really surprising, I don't think it necessarily implies anything about the Stig and is not relevant. Halsteadk 18:40, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey, some people here want this info in there. I don't, but i'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. However, if they continue to muck up the area and erase the ambiguous part, then I will vote for a complete removal. I dunno, someone give me a valid reason as to why the report should be mentioned on Stiggy's article.--293.xx.xxx.xx 09:22, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, interesting debate. On the one hand leaving the H&S report mention in with a properly worded disclaimer (I prefer my disclaimer to 293's as it is a mere statement of fact rather than appealing to the reader to "not draw any conclusions") is in keeping with the philosophy of being an encyclopedia. On the other hand the mere inclusion of it could be construed as original research since inserting it creates a link (in our own minds) that was not documented before. On that basis though, most of the F1 driver's references, except Hill and Webber, have to go as well. They are the only two to be DIRECTLY and unambiguously hinted to possibly be the Stig (and Webber only jokingly at that). All the others are by inference of the viewer which is basically us making a linked in our own minds based on our interpretation of the comments made on the show. I say remove everything except the explicit in-show references (and any claims that can be sourced to a reliable secondary source). Zunaid©® 13:24, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

You also forgot Button's comment that "The stig isn't a Formula 1 Driver" which can be properly attributed to the episode in question. --293.xx.xxx.xx 22:01, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Button's comment can be taken either way. -Roddie Digital 23:31, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
His comment could just be taken at face value - he isn't a (current) F1 driver. It's utterly obvious that it's not one person anyway - they simply would not get an F1 or other pro racing driver (or at least one that can equal Mansell or Hill's laptime) in to dress up in an anonymous suit if he's just driving a Caterham up a motorway, or sitting in the studio being mute - TG has a budget from licence-payers' money!! I'd assert that "the Stig" is a TG buzzword for any number of faceless (to the public) driving consultants, in the same way a film crew would refer to runners, grips or focus pullers. Unfortunately I have no proof(!), but I just don't think there is much basis for so much interest in who's in the suit, as it's probably about as interesting as who's working the mike boom (and might even be the same person occasionally). PS, in James May's interview with Sky News recently, he stated that HE was the Stig! Halsteadk 12:24, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Hahaha, now that I would believe, it would be fantastic. Maybe he's actually got short hair really, or is even bald, and his trademark King James Spaniel mop is a wig (and they had to find a way to make it stay on in open-topped cars, hence the reason they did the wig vs cabriolet test... note the Stig has normally no visible hair)... the whole Captain Slow persona as a Superman vs Clark Kent cover story (although it's been demonstrated he CAN, if not beat, then at least keep up with the other two in competitive driving when he wants to). Note also you never see the two of them together, at least not competing - and he's of an appropriate height and build (Clarkson too tall and gangly, Hammond too short and underbuilt). Excellent theory :D 82.46.180.56 (talk) 12:47, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

The report names a specific person, describing his job in a way which makes it possible he is the Stig. If there's other names with similar documented connections to the show, they could all be in a "Stig Candidates" section. But there's stuff that gets into NOR territory. Zhochaka (talk) 22:09, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

All this debate is ridiculous, anybody involved in motorsport knows full well Ben Collins is the stig - he hardly keeps it quiet - I find it hard to believe that any reference to this in the article gets removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.212.149 (talk) 17:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

And that's your opinion, to which you are entitled. The trouble is, there's a big difference in what we know intuitively and what can be supported factually. "[Anyone] involved in motorsport..." is a gross overgeneralization, and utterly unprovable. What's more, everyone (supposedly) knowing something doesn't make it so. To use a gross over-simplification to illustrate a point, I could say everyone involved in astronomy knows the moon is made of green cheese. Doesn't make it true, now does it? So, until such time as their is reliable, supportable evidence that Ben Collins, Lewis Hamilton or Doctor Who is The Stig, any such references are gonna be removed. --Drmargi (talk) 21:49, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Someone at the IP 84.9.46.99 went through making wierd and often racist changes to the article including changing the Black Stig to the Nigger Stig, changing Clarkson's school from Repton to some Islamic school and changing the stunt drivers name from Dan Lang to Danny Langdon(???). Reverted but that guy could do with blocking.--Santahul 12:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of why the stig changed.

A while ago (must be about 6 months or so ago) I was looking at this article and I'm sure I remember some sort of part where it explained why the stig changed from black to white (out od universe) why was it removed or does it not merit inconclusion? Agent452 15:47, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I've just noticed that this is explained in identity *Note to self: read more carefully* however a user added a bit in so it's now in two sections if anyone wants to remove it they can Agent452 18:59, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Introductions...

In which series was the humorous "facts" introduced because I distinctly remember some episodes where they wouldn't do them (the one I'm specifically thinking of Clarkson said something along these lines "There's only one person to do it, lets say moushi-moushi to the Sting")Agent452 20:35, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

and on a completely unrelated point. The whole section on introductions is still there. Could anyone have a look thorough and attribute them to episodes in wikiquote...I'll try a bit myself but whats left over please feel free to do for me!Agent452 15:29, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


The one given as an example there ("say mushi-mushi to Stig-san", who then went on to do a pair of power laps in two competing japanese 4wd sports saloons - or "avante, Stigissimo!" when testing an Alfa) would be one of the shorter, simpler introductions given in the earlier series, before they changed the style and proportions of various items somewhat. EG fewer serious (less exciting!) road tests, more elaborate introductions for white stig, etc. 82.46.180.56 (talk) 12:37, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I've been working for a while on confirming and attributing all the Stig introductions. It requires watching each Top Gear episode, so it takes some time, for which I apologise. My intention is to begin the section with an explanation on the origin of the Top Gear custom of introducing the Stig with an absurd but humorous "Some say" quote, and then go on to list the actual introductions, with reference to the corresponding episode. I can't say yet whether a bulleted list or a table will be easier on the eye, but I will aim for readability and visitor-friendliness.
I'm aware they're all on WikiQuote, but I believe the article would be much the worse for their lack, for various reasons:

  1. If the reader is a fan of Top Gear, he/she will be amused to find the whole list of Stig introductions in one place.
  2. If the visitor doesn't know the show and has come to the article to find out who or what the Stig is, I believe he/she will be entertained by the humorous quotes.
  3. As someone mentioned in the debate on this issue above, this page links to a WikiQuote page dedicated to Top Gear, where the Stig introductions are drowned out by the mass of other quotations from the show. That page will soon become so big it will have to be split, and finding the Stig intros will become even harder.
  4. Without the intros the Stig article is only 1300 words long, with them it bulks up to 2300.
  5. If the intros are placed at the end of the article they won't clutter the page, or hinder passing readers from the main information higher up.

Once I've posted the final result I'm perfectly amenable to a request for comments if anyone thinks it necessary. ↔ Dennywuh 17:04, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Whilst it is useful to have all the introductions in the right place (When the wikiquote article gets split perhaps the Stig may get his own page) in my opinion we don't unnecessarily need every single Stig quote here in this article as as it stands right now it looks quite out of place and does clutter it up. Perhaps it would be better to have a section explaining the introductions and a selection of some of the better ones. But thats my opinion anyway —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agent452 (talk • contribs) 17:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory seems pretty blatant to me that this list of quotes does not belong here, the fact that ardent fans of the show may find them amusing or they are not so clear on another website is not a reason for them to be here, against an official policy of this site - Wikiquote is a wiki so tidy them up there. The fact that their removal would halve the size of the article actually suggests to me that they should be removed and the rest of the article "bulked up" with valid material. Halsteadk 21:16, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Can some wikipedians in the know please make clear some of the more obscure references occurring in the later Stig introductions either with appropriate Wiki links or [bracket text]. For example I totally don't get the reference to being banned from the town of Chichester and buying a slightly dented white Fiat Uno from the Duke of Edinburgh. Sturmovik 16:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

The Fiat Uno reference relates to claims of a white Fiat Uno being involved in the road crash that killed Princess Diana, and the bizarre conspiracy theories that the Duke of Edinburgh also had some involvement in it. Halsteadk 21:13, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
This revision of the wikiquote Top Gear article (right at the bottom) has lots of links in it, for example showing there reference to Zidane's head-butt in the world cup final. The links broke as I copied and pasted from wikipedia, but they could easily be fixed. Personally I think wikiquote would be a good place for these, I don't know why they were removed. -- TrulyBlue (talk) 17:21, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
The Chichester thing, however, is completely random as far as I'm aware. Some of the descriptions are included as straight absurdities rather than actual references to anything particular, e.g. "his nipples are magnetic, and if you tune your radio to 88.1 FM you can hear his thoughts". 82.46.180.56 (talk) 12:33, 11 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Paperboard Stig

Does anyone know where I can buy a life-size paperboard stig figure for our car related design agency? Or does anyone know if there is a photo of him it in high resolution? --212.105.208.198 18:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I suppose you could try the Top Gear production department at the BBC (maybe there's a conact from the BBC web site?). I'd guess, however, that the Stig image would be seen as the property of the BBC (or the Top Gear production company if it's not the Beeb) and they may be a bit sticky about another commercial enterprise using the image. Speculation on my part, and this isn't realy the place for this request or discussion - try a Top Gear fan site, including the BBC. cheers TrulyBlue 09:54, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Stig's outfit and helmet

For what it's worth: I have determined which specific model of helmet and racing suit the Stig uses by comparing scenes of him in episodes where he is clearly visible to those shown in helmet/suit website catalogs. As far as the (main) helmet is concerned, it is a Simpson Diamondback. He uses this helmet I'd say 90% of the time (100% of the time if you only consider power laps), but in a few episodes he uses a different model which appears to be the Simpson Bandit (i.e. the episode where he tries to do a an indoor drag race in an F1 car). The suit is made by Alpinestars: an all white version of the GP Tech. His gloves are Alpinestars Tech 1-ZX. I have not determined what kind of shoes he uses either.

69.92.11.227 (talk) 06:35, 6 December 2007 (UTC)AC

[edit] Records

Does someone want to change the Records bit? The Stig posted a fastest lap time in an Ascari A10 last night (9th December 2007). It is an official time since its a road legal car!! James193.1.30.2 (talk) 18:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I think Clarkson has a supplimentary rule that cars must also be "street-practical", ie. that they have to be able to clear a speed-bump, which the A10 can't. TrulyBlue (talk) 10:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
It was put in the "road cars" category on the program. Apparently it has a "hydraulic lifting nose" to get over humps. 81.187.153.189 (talk) 08:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
My mistake. The A10 was declared practical and went to the top of the power laps board. TrulyBlue (talk) 09:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Stig's Music Choices

I feel that something should be added about The Stig's random selection of music that can be heard frequently in the show when he is driving the test track. It is quite Humorous. 11 Dec. 2007. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.53.0.83 (talk) 05:26, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

There is a mention already in the article, located Here Agent452 (talk) 11:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Its not "tamed" racing driver.

The error has to do with accent. The Stig is not the "tamed racing driver" as indicated in the first paragraph, but the "team" racing driver!

Now you can stick that in your Ipod (which May pronounces as "ee-pod", with a soft "i" sound, as in the word "if") when you drive in your Subaru Imprezza (which they properly pronounce, "imprettza", as in the original Italian. I know, its a Japanese car, but the name is Italian.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.224.145.171 (talk) 02:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

It is most certainly "tame" (or on occasion, "tamed"). Also, it's not "imprettza" - it's spelt "Impreza" and is therefore pronounced more like "Impreyza" in Italian. Secret Squïrrel 01:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes it is 'tamed' race driver - and Jeremy Clarkson has hardly got an accent (if you are English) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.74.97.195 (talk) 04:40, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I didn't mean to imply that Jeremy has the accent, rather that the person who originally called Stiggy "tamed" misunderstood what Jeremy had said, because of the listener's linguistic bias.

There are several other times in the series when you can hear one or another of the presenters use the word "team" and is sounds unmistakably like the "tamed" that some are saying describes The Stig. Having seen almost all of the episodes, many of them several times, I feel there is no doubt that it is "team", not "tamed". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.183.166.135 (talk) 01:27, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

It may be "tame" or "tamed", but it most certainly is NOT "team". A simple Google search also supports that no-one else has interpreted it as "team" - on either side of the Atlantic. Halsteadk (talk) 23:34, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

It is the "tame" racing driver! 86.142.167.109 (talk) 20:41, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

As an englander, it is most certainly "tamed". The joke is supposed to be that racing drivers are more animal than human (along with the inability to speak or interact in any meaningful way other than driving very quickly, being transported in the hold on aircraft, etc), and so the Stig had to be caught from the wild, rather than recruited. I wouldn't be surprised if it hasn't appeared in print/online in several significant places e.g. the TG website and in the magazine, or JC/RHs books.
Also, it's misleading to describe James' pronunciation of "iPod" as "ee-pod"... it's more "ipp-odd" (in place of "eye pod"), and again, this is a punning joke rather than the way he actually thinks it should be said. Compare their other humorous allusions to faddish modern things that might stereotypically be thought to be beyond petrol-head middle aged men (despite the fact they're probably quite savvy) - Interweb, MyFace (as a term for generic social networking sites), and the infamous Flappy Paddle Gearbox (which has damn near become a common term for electronic paddle-shift transmissions, despite it originally being a term of abuse). I counter instead that anyone thinking it's "Team" is the one having problems with accent - and vernacular / humour :) 82.46.180.56 (talk) 12:13, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] its not 'tamed'

i believe it is 'tame racing driver' as opposed to 'tamed racing driver'


in response: it varies on occasion.also some one should point out the fact in earlier episodes jeremy used his tamed racing driver section to suggest the fact that he isnt human. but now he uses that time to have a dig at contempary issues. such as in an early episodes "some say he has hooves for hands" in a later episode he said something along the lines of" if he had to divorce paul macartney he would shut his mouth and leave with her own millions!"

Yes... it goes either way. Perhaps originally it was "tamed" with the early introductions for White Stig (still requiring the harsh end of the breaker's whip), but now the newcomer has had time to settle in and make a home in a warm corner of the paddock, he's simply "tame". :D
I can't believe I just wrote that, BTW 82.46.180.56 (talk) 12:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Shortened introductions

Hi. Following some recent comments on this page I've reworded the intro to the section and added a shortened version of the introductions. I've removed the "Some say" and "all we know" portions to save space, and formatted them as a list with the same objective. A few of the latest are missing, Series 10 Episode 3 onwards, which I shall add ASAP.

It's my humble opinion that these are valuable additions to this article, as they are a crucial part of the character. Not of the driver inside, but of the 'The Stig' persona, which is, after all, what this page is about. I know they're all on Wikiquote, and I'm aware this is a controversial point for some editors, but I hope we can have a cordial and polite discussion rather than an edit war. ↔ Dennywuh (talk) 20:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

We can indeed have a cordial and polite discussion. They are all on Wikiquote, and a gigantic list of quotes is not encyclopaedic. There have been previous discussions that agreed on this. I appreciate your boldness, but I have been equally bold and undone the addition. Neıl ☎ 09:32, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Surely the way to do this is to give a couple of examples in the Stig article, and point people to a full list on Wikiquote? There needs to be some explanation somewhere of the relevance of things like skiving off to play croquet (John Prescott); headbutting to the chest (Zidane); and Fiat Puntos and the Duke of Edinburgh (Diana conspiracy theories). I'd do this but want to make sure it has concensus support, and I don;t have the time right now. TrulyBlue (talk) 09:53, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Dear Neil, thank you for your swift revert of my edits. If I may, I have a few comments for you:
— How are other editors expected to give their opinion on the shortened version if it's not there for them to see? The information is neither offensive nor disruptive, and I see no reason why it could not have stayed on the page at least until this discussion got under way.
— You state that previous discussions agreed the introductions should go. I've read this talk page and its archive, and I find no such quorum. On the contrary, previous debates only concur that prior lists were too long, which is why I shortened this one. Please let us know which discussion came to this unequivocal agreement.
— This article is titled, and is about, The Stig, a fictitious persona existing only in the Top Gear universe. The only details we know of this character are what we're told by the show's presenters, and the majority of these comments come in the form of these humorous "introductions". How can the main source of information on the subject of the article not be relevant?
— Maybe the title of the section, Introductions, is misleading. It may give the impression this is just a collection of presenters' gags, or a list of names The Stig's been called, when it's actually a description of who (or what) he is. They might be easier for some to stomach headed Characteristics or What we know about him.
↔ Dennywuh (talk) 11:38, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Dennywuh,
  • Is the version on your talk page sub-page the "shortened version"? If so it's way too long.
  • It IS "just a collection of presenters' gags"!
  • Even if you want to use the information as a basis for a description of the character by writing them in an encyclopedic tone and not as quotes; if you think "His scrotum has its own small gravity field, and because our producer rigged a phone vote, he now has a new name... Cuddles." is NOT a joke and DOES belong in an encyclopedia, you need to review your grasp of Wikipedia policy. Mark83 (talk) 12:04, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
I agree that this article is not the place for these - we should not be duplicating work done elsewhere by reproducing a full list. There will inevitably be problems with giving a sample - who's to say which ones to include, and ultimately other editors will just come along and add their own. I also really don't believe that they are any more than gags - they are not intended to be "descriptions of who (or what) he is", the fact that many of them are based on topical news (eg buying a white Fiat Uno from the Duke of Edinburgh) supports this. He has been more regularly described with other characteristics suggesting an emotionless, fearless, almost robotic man, and that is more appropriate for this article - it is also more helpful in defining his primary role on the show which is to drive cars as quickly as possible around the track. Halsteadk (talk) 13:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
We need to one, just for an example. But any more than that is pure cruft. mattbuck (talk) 14:01, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Just to respond to Dennywuh's request - people can see the list you added via the article's history page. Or they can view this diff: [2]. You added ~6k of one liners in a list - how is that "shortened"? There's already one or two there as examples, that really should be enough. Neıl ☎ 14:42, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello all, and thanks for your opinions. A couple of replies, in no particular order:
— It's a shortened version because it's 660 words over 26 lines, as opposed to the last one (diff), which was 1143 words over 44 lines. Despite the reduction, it still contains every single one (bar the last few I mention above are pending).
— I haven't said these aren't jokes, in the deleted heading I described them as "humorous and usually absurd details". Top Gear is an entertainment programme known for its humour, and it's only to be expected that these definitions be light-hearted and frivolous, a fact that doesn't render them less relevant. ↔ Dennywuh (talk) 16:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that in fact all the Stig quotes were missing from the referenced wikiquote page - I've retrieved them from a previous edit and put them in. However, the Top Gear quotes page is far too long, so maybe we need a The Stig quotes page?. TrulyBlue (talk) 10:14, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Problem is the quotes are not actually said by the Stig thus attributing them to him would be incorrect. But yeah it would be nice to have them on an individual page Agent452 (talk) 12:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
If we did that for every subject with quotes, what would be the point of Wikiquote? I agree with Mattbuck as long as there is a "sustainable" way of selecting one - ie it won't lead to other people adding more or continually changing it to their own arbitrary favourite. Maybe the last used one from the series with a hidden note (using <!--HTML comments-->) to deter others from coming in and editing against consensus - however, we're not heading towards any consensus at all at the moment! Halsteadk (talk) 12:13, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Whilst it's not a consensus the majority verdict seems to be to not have them in the article here. I think we should select one topical one and one ridiculous one as opposed to updating it with each episode. Agent452 (talk) 12:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough, no introductions in the article. If anyone is curious about them or wishes to read them for entertainment purposes, I'm leaving them archived in my userspace, here. Peace. ↔ Dennywuh (talk) 21:22, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stig Mk. 1 = Stig Mk. 2?

Hello, Just speculation really, and do not want this anywhere in the article or anything, but why do we all assume there is a new Stig? I mean, for all we know it could be the same man, albeit under different clothes... The thing is, when the Liana was dumped in favour of the Lacetti, the old Lap Time board was rendered useless, as they now drove a different car. But if the 'benchmark', unbiased driver changes, doesn't that mean a different driving style, different skills, different abilities, and thus ultimately - a different benchmark? This would leave the Power Lap Times board equally useless on transition from Stig I to Stig II. Yet it seems that the Top Gear production team has not even shown a slightest bit of worry about this. Perhaps because they didn't need to... George Adam Horváth (talk) 20:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

It's a theory to be sure, but not suitable for Wikipedia. We have no solid evidence for the identity of The Stig Mk.2 as you put it so it's as unverifiable to say it's McCarthy as it is to say it's Ben Collins. As you said yourself, "just speculation" which should be confined to forums and not Wikipedia articles or talk pages. It is Ben Collins tho! :) Sorry, need to follow my own advice. Mark83 (talk) 21:43, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Only thing is...I seem to remember an episode where they put the White Stig in the original car and he posted a faster time than the Black Stig...although maybe I'm mistaken and it was the new car Agent452 (talk) 22:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

i would like to disagree with the fact the power lap time board isnt useless for this reason: they had to scrap it because the power output between both cars is different. they dont have to change power lap times because its just a representation to decide what is the best overall vehcile and the fact that the drivers have slightly different abilities is irelevent —Preceding unsigned comment added by HungryGoth (talk • contribs) 21:02, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

There is also no evidence that the person in the Stig suit is the same person each week anyway. Halsteadk (talk) 13:06, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Not to mention the basic flaw in assuming the power lap times are all that scientific to start with, eg wet laps are compared to dry ones with a simple "probably about 4 seconds" rule of thumb, the cars only appear to do one lap of the circuit from a standing start (so a momentary slip by the driver could affect the time - though its perfectly possible they do several and take the average for all we know), etc. Therefore it's moot as to whether a different Stig would give noticably (or statistically significantly) different times in any one car in identical conditions, so long as they choose from a pool of reasonably competent competition or test drivers (note the fairly rich lineup they were able to attract for something as frivolous - but potentially dangerous to life, limb and career - as the B-Zero football match... throw in the chance to be the Stig for the day and abuse supercars with complete anonymity, and they arguably could get anyone).
It's actually a little more scientific for the SIARPC segment, given that they invited back a spread of previous contestants to re-benchmark it and give a better idea of whether or not any given newcomer was fast or slow in general... so long as you ignore that those who had little driving experience may have had more practice, they were all a year or three older, and of course had prior knowledge of the track layout. 82.46.180.56 (talk) 12:25, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NO to the new article....not now anyway

No offense, but considering this is up right now, the last thing we need is more ammunition for the folks to get the other articles deleted to point this out. Doing a redirect for the time being. --293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 08:59, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

  • I'm also gonna add that splitting the article into two actually eliminates a significant amount of references that are not Top Gear related (either show wise or magazine) and gives the "Main" Stig article possible foul of not citing reliable sources. The excised info only leaves two "Non-Top Gear" Sources, vs the current 6 right now.--293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 09:05, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] African-American Stig???? in Botswana

Whomever included the info about the Stig's African cousin referred to him as the African-American Stig presumably for PC reasons--avoiding calling him 'black'. (Perhaps this is also to avoid confusion over the earlier, & now deceased, Black Stig. Anyway I cannot see any reasonable explanation for calling the African Stig 'African American' when taking into consideration that the show is filmed primarily for British audiences, and this segment was actually filmed in Africa. Any objections to referring to African Stig as dark-skinned? 68.103.6.83 (talk) 05:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I edited to change the description from (ugh!) dark-skinned, which is just patronizing, to black, which is perfectly acceptable and accurate. --Drmargi (talk) 06:08, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks--wasn't sure, since someone obviously went for the attempt at PC, and I wasn't trying to step on any toes. I was pretty sure, however, that African-American applied only to American citizens of African descent, and not everyone in the world who is black. 68.103.6.83 (talk) 03:45, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure! The African-American usage is an easy assumption to make, and no big deal. My concern is we get a bit liverish at times about using perfectly acceptable, widely used descriptors when we shouldn't. Describing an African-American/African/African-Whatever as black, when in fact they are, is done all the time, is more precise and carries no negative connotations. I think sometimes in an effort to be sensitive and respectful, we have a little trouble finding the line we shouldn't cross, and draw it a little too soon. (Plaudits to you for being so easy-going about it all.) --Drmargi (talk) 18:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Wouldn't it just be simpler to refer to him as they do on the show - as "African"? Which wouldn't be a terribly innaccurate, or uncommon, description of someone from Botswana FFS. As in, The Stig's African Cousin. I would hope there'd be no more offense in the implied generic description there (dark skinned, typically fairly lean and tall) than there would be in describing myself as North European (stockier and pale). There's room for PC, but sometimes description is just that, and you need to stop being afraid of people claiming prejudice when there isn't any. 82.46.180.56 (talk) 12:30, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

The point was to describe physical appearance (i.e. black) rather than nationality, which has to be assumed, and from which we them must assume a set of physical characteristics. We saw the guy was black. It's perfect appropriate and most accurate to say so. This all strikes me as a non-issue. --Drmargi (talk) 18:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree with regard to the description of physical appearance, after all not all Africans are black, so 'African' does not conjure up any particular image to me. [I only used dark-skinned initially because in my interactions with high school and college students, I have noticed a trend toward dumping 'black' and 'white' as skin descriptors. I personally am not offended by the terms, but neither are the elderly (around here) offended by the terms 'colored' or 'negro'--but on the whole, we have replaced those terms. So in light of the possibility of 'b/w' getting phased out I went with 'dark-skinned'. But this honestly isn't the forum for a PC battle.] Either term (black or dark-skinned)is definitely more appropriate than African-American in this case, at least!68.103.6.83 (talk) 22:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


hi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.240.45.5 (talk) 16:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)