Talk:To Tell the Truth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the To Tell the Truth article.
Article policies
Good article To Tell the Truth was one of the Everyday life good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Maintained The following user(s) are actively involved with this article and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources:
User:FamicomJL
This in no way implies article ownership; all editors are encouraged to contribute.
To-do: edit · history · watch · refresh

Here are some tasks you can do:
  • Verify: Add more reliable citations and sources. Garry Moore's page has some good ones for the Moore/Garagiola section of TTTT. I'm sure we can find more.
  • Cleanup: Famous contestants section.
  • Expand: Episode status, which needs sources and exact numbers.
  • Disambiguation: Joe Garagiola to Joe Garagiola.

Contents

[edit] mini game

Should "mini game" be one or two words? Rlquall 00:07, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Damn good question. I dunno. I did it as one. You could probably also spell it as mini-game. --Woohookitty 01:59, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Last NYC game show?

Didn't Pyramid air from NYC for a while after the time frame of TTTT discussed here? Rlquall 03:18, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Listing panelists

I don't see the point to listing every panelist who did TTTT, especially the 1990-91 version, which didn't have a regular panel per se. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 09:04, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disambiguation

To Tell the Truth is also the name of Charles Robert Jenkins' autobiography. Any objection if I move this page to To Tell the Truth (gameshow) and make To Tell the Truth a disambig? cab 09:06, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I would object. A Japanese-language little-known book is hardly on equivalent level with a series that's been produced for over 50 years all over the world, and I doubt an article for it would have any info not included in the man's own wiki entry.

Perhaps this line at the top:

To Tell the Truth is also the title of the autobiography of desering U.S. soldier Charles Robert Jenkins.

Lambertman 17:32, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Point taken and made the change as you suggested. Though to be honest, before coming to this page I had heard quite a bit about Jenkins and the book (which was actually written originally in English, just not published in that language yet); never even knew it was also the name of a TV show. (I am living neither in the US nor Japan). Wonder if that was where Jenkins got the title from, since it was first shown when he was in his teens. cab 06:15, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tangents

The article is, overall, fairly well-written, but it does go into a lot of irrelevance. Plus, the writer(s) go on a lot of tangents. The writer(s) often stray from the subject. The name of the article is "To Tell The Truth." There is too much anecdotal stuff about other game shows, and about other things. Just my two cents. I have begun to attempt to edit it, but it's going to take some time. It needs a lot of work. By the way, no hard feelings intended. That's meant to be constructive criticism. Slater79 21:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article nomination

I've nominated this to be a Good Article. FamicomJL 23:16, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

nevermind. Time to re-tool it! FamicomJL 01:57, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
I have re-nominated it now that I have added citations, sources, and fixed up the images. Let's hope it gets accepted! FamicomJL 00:18, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA Failed

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
  5. It is stable.
  6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
    a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
  7. Overall:
    a Pass/Fail:

I hate to do this, because (with few exceptions) this is a very well-written article. In general, self-published websites are not reliable sources for an article. (See WP:URS and WP:SPS.) I know it may be difficult to find published sources about a television series, but I recently reviewed an article on the game show QI, which cited episodes themselves as sources, in addition to the show's official website. If you have questions about the policy, it might be better to ask at WP:RS, because I in no way consider myself an expert. Good luck, and keep working! shoy 18:53, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Overall, a fair and balanced review. And as I expected, the sources did the article in. I have some issues with the fail on the references and sources. That was a bad point about QI, because of one thing: It is a show still on today. To Tell the Truth ended a LONG time ago, especially the versions I'm sure that have bad sources. It's VERY hard to find anything on a reliable website (or book, no less...) about the 1969-1978, 1980-1981, and 1990-1991 versions of To Tell the Truth. There are also NO books that are all about those versions. The Encyclopedia of TV Game Shows has no info as well, just a small blurb. What do you suppose we do? The problem is, it's not like a website from the creators (Both who are dead,) is going to pop-up in a matter of seconds.
Like, perfect example, GSN.com GSN is the channel that is behind and has the rights to rerun all versions of the show. The section on classic To Tell the Truth tells us NOTHING. Just a small lazily done blurb.
What do you suppose I do? The fact of the matter is, it's pretty much near impossible to find published sources, especially for this series. No books were made about the show, the Encyclopedia of TV Game Shows has not much of a mention, the website that reruns the show yields no help. What else is there to find or do? I've honestly looked high and low. Thanks for your time. FamicomJL 19:12, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] If you are going to GA-Review this, PLEASE READ

This failed last time due to not having good sources and episode citations. I have added some. Due to the fact that some citated episodes aired in syndication, and would air on different dates in different cities, I have only added the year they aired. The Ally Sheedy episode citation is the only exception, due to the fact that one of the panelists mentioned that the film Jaws was going to air the day after the taping. Please take the above in consideration, thank you. FamicomJL 05:55, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review

I have taken on To Tell the Truth for review under the Good Article criteria, as nominated on the Good article candidates page by FamicomJL. You'll be pleased to hear that the article meets none of the quick-fail criteria, so I will shortly be conducting an in-depth review and will post the results below.

Where an article is not an outright pass, but requires relatively minor additional work to be brought up to GA standard, I will normally place it on hold - meaning that editors have around a week to address any issues raised. As a precaution to prevent failure by default should this occur, if editors are likely to be unavailable over the next ten days or so, feel free to leave a message on my talk page so we can arrange a more convenient time for review. I have read the above comment regarding sources, and this will be taken into account ;)

Regards, EyeSereneTALK 19:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Right now is good, unless some emergency comes up, which seems unlikely. Thank you! :) FamicomJL 19:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Great - I like to check first as too many end up failing for want of attention. I'll post a full review sometime tomorrow. Regards, EyeSereneTALK 19:36, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA on hold

I have now reviewed the article, and have placed GA status on hold pending a few issues being dealt with - these are detailed below under the six Good Article criteria.

1. MoS and prose: FAIL

I've copyedited the intro slightly for clarity - it's actually a surprisingly difficult game concept to explain succinctly. Please correct any mistakes I've introduced ;) There are also other areas that need attention:

  • The article uses "/" in a few places - these should be removed and the sentences reworded if necessary.

*There are some partial dates that are wikilinked - really only full dates (ie day-month-year) should be wikilinked as it allows them to be displayed according to the user preferences.

Ummm... ignore that, sorry. I think I must have been looking at the linked decades (which of course is perfectly ok) :P EyeSereneTALK 20:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Consistency is slightly patchy in the name of the show. Sometimes it is given in full, others it's abbreviated to TTTT, and sometimes TTTT (no italics)
  • The article contains a lot of text in parentheses, which breaks up the flow of the prose. It would read better if most of these were removed and sentences reworded if necessary.
  • One of the image captions mentions 'viewer votes', but I could not find a reference to this in the article anywhere. Do the TV audience get to join in the vote? This either needs explanation in the text, or if it is incorrect, should be removed
  • The introduction should summarise the main article and be capable of standing as a sort of 'mini-article' in it own right. I would recommend putting the explanation of how the game works under a separate heading, and expanding the remaining intro text to cover the whole of the article (maybe a couple of sentences per section?). See WP:LEAD for more information.

2. Factual accuracy and verifiability WEAK PASS

I think you've done a reasonable job sourcing given your comments above - obviously this would not pass FA, and I would prefer more sources, but I think it is just about adequate for GA status. For further improvement in the future, additional sourcing would be the main area to concentrate on to avoid any accusations of original research (not that I believe there is any!).

3. Broadness of coverage PASS

The article subject is covered very comprehensively, and the article stays focused - it may be worth in the future forking off the season sections into articles of their own if you intend to add more to them.

4. Neutrality PASS

There is no evidence of bias in the article.

5. Stability PASS

The article is stable and not subject to recent edit-warring.

6. Images PASS

'Fair Use', as I'm sure you know, is not the ideal tag for WP, and would again generate objections at FA. However, the rationale given is sound, the images are appropriate, and they are suitably captioned.

You've done a great job with this article so far - I'll look forward to re-reviewing when you are ready. Hold gives up to a week for the above points to be dealt with, so I'll check back here next weekend if I haven't heard from you before then. Any questions etc, don't hesitate to get in touch. All the best, EyeSereneTALK 20:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

No, actually you summed the opening paragraph up nicely. I agree that it's a pain to recap good enough.
  • I'll get to work on the slashies issue.DONE, With the ones that are "Moore/Garagiola" left in, since that's the version of the show. That version had two hosts, one leaving and another taking over. Took out the other ones, though.
  • By partial dates, you mean in the article, or in the references?
My mistake, there aren't any! I've struck this on the list above - sorry! EyeSereneTALK 20:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I'll get to work on that. DONE, Changed them all to either To Tell the Truth or Truth, when needed.
  • I'll get to work on that as well right away. DONE
  • My bad, I mean audience votes, I'll make sure to change that right away. DONE
  • I'll get to work on that as well. DONE

2. Yeah, that's what I've mostly been working on, pain in the butt when it's a show where the syndicated runs mean it aired on different dates in different parts of the U.S. :(. I might also try to get in contact with one of the hosts of the show, if I can. I'm sure an interview would help. :)

3. Agreed, not yet though. :)

Ok, I'll get to work on all of that. Thanks for the review, and hope to see you next time to say that it's a GA! :) FamicomJL 20:24, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

UPDATE, I'm out for now, by later tonight I'll get the name issue done with, and tell you when I finish making corrections. FamicomJL 20:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey, don't worry about it. One less thing for me to worry about. :) FamicomJL 20:55, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA Pass

Congratulations on an excellent copyedit on the suggestions provided. I now have no hesitation in passing To Tell the Truth as a Good Article, and have listed it as such on the Good Articles page under Social sciences and society > Media > Television and Radio shows and series. For the record, FamicomJL was the major contributor to this GA pass, with 22 edits between the start and end of the GA review process (only editors with 5 or more edits are listed). For future improvement, the lead section would benefit from further expansion, and the task of finding additional references should to be continued.

You have put in a lot of work on this article, and deserve credit for your efforts. Well done! EyeSereneTALK 14:08, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Yay, thanks! :) So glad that all of my hard work has payed off. FamicomJL 16:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Take 6 doing the theme in 1990

Still no source, but I'd heard that story years and years ago, so that editor didn't make it up, at the very least. Lambertman (talk) 17:48, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Alright, but has any reliable source reported it? It's too bad, too, that'd be a great thing to add to the article if it had a source. FamicomJL (talk) 06:18, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article Reassessment

Please see this page to discuss whether this article should retain its GA listing. Majoreditor (talk) 16:46, 7 May 2008 (UTC)