Talk:Have I Got News for You

Writers?

Is it worth mentioning the writers of the show? I've just read an interview with them here: http://www.sitcom.co.uk/writers/haveigotnewsforyou.shtml —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.150.233 (talk) 19:15, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

One more high point

not been able to ref the series or episode but hte one with [Jack Dee] where they keep on making names for pot noodles —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.100.103.136 (talk) 16:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Older entries

I removed:

Germaine Greer's on-air excoriation of rival newspaper columnist Suzanne Moore and concomitant introduction into the English language of the expression "fuck-me boots".

Greer's comments on "fuck-me shoes" (not boots) were first published in the Grauniad (or indeed written for the Grauniad and leaked to the Evening Standard). What she said on HIGNFY is here: http://www.hignfy.net/transcripts14.htm.

Also, libel is when a defamation is in "permanent form", including a television programme, as per http://www.writersworld.tv/authors/libellaws.htm --rbrwr

Ummm... why refer to the Guardian by Private Eye's joke-name for it? SoM 11:48, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I was probably in a frivolous mood. It was a long time ago, I was young... Anyway, I assume that anyone who is sufficiently interested in HIGNFY to read this talk page would understand and appreciate the reference (or at least be able to work out which publication is meant). I've made it a wikilink for the benefit of anyone who might still be confused. --rbrwr^± 12:44, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

All it deserves. Alecto 20:14, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. I only even mentioned it (IIRC) because it's a featured article.--SoM 19:10, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

---

• Fan site with reviews, links, etc

I've removed the above link, because the link no longer works. The site may have been used as a reference, in which case can we still verify everything on the page? I expect so, since it's a very well-known programme and all that, but I just thought I'd better draw people's attention to the potential problem. What do we do when websites used as references disappear, anyway? Do we have to remove all the material we got from them which can't be verified elsewhere? -- Oliver P. 22:47 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Removing information?! Surely not! I had hoped to leave the dead link, to emphasise the fact that it was there, but no longer - I rather suspect (unsubstantiated) that the BBC over zealously shut down the fansite... --ntnon 00.06 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Some of it's available from the Wayback Machine at http://www.archive.org (though we can't necessarily rely it remaining there, either). The Greer transcript I mention above is at [1] --rbrwr

Hi, I owned the website in question, and the BBC id not shut it own but in fact actively linked to it, as proved by BBC Online stories related to HIGNFY. The site shut down because I could not long afford the time and the price of webspace had gone up. The link to Off The Telly at the bottom of the page refers to an article written by me, of which there are further parts to be published soon.

I don't remember the exact details but I remember a Tory MP once sued the BBC and Hatrick Publications for publishing a book acompanying the programme called Have I Got 1997 For You which said he was a "bastard" or a "shit" or something along those lines. If anyone remembers any more details of the case please post them here. Saul Taylor

"Conniving little shit", apparently. --rbrwr

Alexander Armstrong

I can't find any evidence that he will be the new perminant host as the article previously stated. Saul Taylor 12:43, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)

See [2].

Hmm, on further viewing, it is written by the AP about reporting from The Sun, of all places, so perhaps we should take it with a pinch of salt...

James F. (talk) 00:12, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I don't think we should say that a new presenter has been apointed until the BBC officially anounces it. Saul Taylor 04:01, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)

He will make his fifth host's appearance in episode 2 of the new series next week. Jeremy Clarkson is due to host episode 1, with Germane Greer as one of the panellists, apparently, so I've edited it to say "Most (broadcast) apparances", so it still says 7 for her. Robert Mc Cann

Can we please keep the updating until after the transmission? Because it was done prematurely, Clarkson was incremented TWICE for one ep. - SoM 16:30, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

He won't, according to BBC official announcements [3] although that is 2005. The Ananova link says it's 2008 but it is not official, has no exact date and has no author. Still it can be true I guess. I have nothing against the guy but I rather enjoy the guest host system. Zubbus (talk) 08:41, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Episodes list

Started Have I Got News For You episodes list. Its my first atempt at doing tables. Saul Taylor 02:27, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Anderson & Duchovny

An anonynomous contributor has added:

Gillian Anderson and David Duchovny were once reported by TV guides as being guests on an upcoming show. When the show aired, two different guests were present, and Angus joked that he didn't know how that had happened.

I don't remember this and I couldn't find any verification substaniating it on Google. Does anyone else remember this happening? Saul Taylor 17:48, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I'm pretty sure this happened - there's a couple of contemporary postings on Google Groups [4]. I think it just seemed like a crap joke at the time, so whether the BBC really did start the rumour I've no idea. Sjorford 21:14, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

On the "Best of HIGNFY" DVD there is a trivia feature - they appear as subtitles - which gives extra info. and background to stories. One of the comments is about this - saying the BBC and production company were inundated with calls when the story was circulated. I will not profit from this so don't consider it an advert - That DVD features clips from the beginning of the show to Angus' last appearance and is EXCELLENT. I've just bought it myself, well worth it (£8.97 from a certain high profile website....)Mark 20:56, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Agreed. Even if you have no knowledge of, memory of, or interest in the people or topics covered on this CD, you'll still split your sides laughing. -- Derek Ross | Talk 04:07, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)

Morgan

Could Piers Morgan's appearance be considered a high point? I'm tempted to put it in. I know its considered the worst appearance by any guest ever but its highly watchable - I think its the same phenomenon as people slowing down to watch a car crash. Mark 21:00, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Boris

What article of HIGNFY could be complete without mention of Boris Johnson appearances. For those who haven't seen these delights (both as guest, and as guest presenter), then the MP for Henley's rambling tangential style is TV gold.

In particular: during his guest presenter appearance, when the autocue would, at every available opportunity, try to get Boris to swear, and his efforts to avoid this.

Paul did that too. Thanks to whoever corrected the DVD synopsis of "The Full Boris". I was sure that it was 90 minutes, but I've watched again this week, just to make sure, and it is indeed 60. But then again, seeing as its Boris we're talking about, it probably feels like 90 minutes each time you watch it. Robert Mc Cann

According to the show's main page Boris has been banned from appearing on the show ever again (with no evidence). On the list of episodes page it shows that Boris is to host the show on the 15th December. Should the 'fact' be deleted? Kelly elf 11:11, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

That's not right, is it? Well, I don't know what the episode list's source is for Boris hosting the last show this series, but if he is we should certainly delete that bit from the main article. Though on a personal note, I'll be highly diasppointed if Kirsty Young isn't presenting any this series. She's clearly the best one.--PaulTaylor 16:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Balls to that! Dara O'Brean! Natural choice.--Crestville 10:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Dara o'Briain is good, but I don't think you really want a comedian hosting it, a non-comedian who's funny is better. Besides, Dara's doing Mock the Week now - he can't have two topical BBC comedy panel shows.--PaulTaylor 15:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Deyton was a comedian. Young is a news presenter - where's she going to get the time to film HIGNFY? I think Dara would ditch Mock the week in a flash if the chance for HIGNFY arose.--Crestville 15:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, Angus Deayton was a comic actor, rather than a straight-up comedian. I know Kirsty Young probably wouldn't be able to do it full-time, what with her proper journalist commitments and Desert Island Discs nowadays. She's still best.--PaulTaylor 15:57, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Image

This article has been listed as a featured article lacking a picture; what about a screen-capture of one of the DVDs?
James F. (talk) 07:48, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Copyright? Is that fair use? If so, could we use, say, the DVD cover from http://www.amazon.com ? See [5] -- ALoan (Talk) 17:07, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I suppose we could use the Amazon cover image, but, frankly the quality isn't much...

A screen-capture would come under Fair Dealings, I imagine, yes, and almost definitely under Fair Use (so the Wikimedia Foundation would be all right, too).

James F. (talk) 02:58, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)

THe picture of Boris, and most certaintly the caption describing him as a future prime minister are entirely inappropriate for this article. Mintguy (T) 00:24, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

There's a better version of the same image at http://www.boriswatch.com, which as it is also derived from the book cover would possibly be OK to use, if it's just the quality that's the problem. And on the caption: is an amusing caption not appriopriate for an article on a comedy programme? Perhaps there is need to add more on Boris's contributions to the show in the article? Richard Taylor 09:40, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I think a picture of Boris somewhere wouldn't be too inappropriate, however, I think such a picture should be lower down on the page, if we include one, as at the moment it is in the place you would expect a picture of the show's logo, or a general screen grab or somelike like that. I do think the boriswatch image is a better one, in any case, as it doesn't have the writing on, but the ideal boris image would be a screen grab, as then it would be a picture of him in the show, which is after all the subject of the article.

As for the caption, I don't think you can justify it merely on the grounds of humour, as it probably won't be clear that it is humourous to people not aware of who boris is. As such, I think you shouldn't say he is a potential future prime minister, unless there is evidence that he is likely to make a bid for PM. Also, I think the caption is too long anyway, and much of the information should be in the article proper.

I do think we should have some information on Boris, although what we want to include is debatable, as there isn't one big moment to focus on like with Hattersley and the Tub of Lard, although his 'kick blair's butt' round would probably qualify. Silverfish 11:26, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Anyone who has been described as "the star of Have I Got News For You" (when campaigning for Henley) needs a prominent mention, but I don't agree with the captioning. Find a moment (the guest presenting episode with the coconuts should do it) and stick it in there. Kinitawowi 11:06, Aug 11, 2004 (UTC)

I put up a hand-drawn version of the HIGNFY title this morning. I'm not sure what Wikipedia's stance is on trademarks though, so this may not be alright. -- Solipsist 11:14, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I think the picture should include Angus Deyton, Paul Merton and Ian Hislop, as they were the original three. Maybe use one where Boris Johnson is a guest star (hey, I'm a Boris fan too). --Nathan 00:00, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Peter Mandelson?

There was at one time a splendid running gag/series of choice moments about Peter Mandelson - shortly after Matthew Parris outed him, so, 1998, I guess. And the Beeb had some kind of a clampdown about mentions of Mandelson, so naturally HIGNFY mentioned him at every possible opportunity. At least, that's how I recollect it - but I'm not quite confident enough in my knowledge to insert it. I'm hoping someone who remembers better will be jogged into adding it by this post ... --JennyRad 16:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Well remembered! I've now added it. Chris 42 17:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

First names or surnames

I was wondering if there's a particular reason why in the 'Running Gags' section, Merton and Hislop are refered to as 'Paul' and 'Ian' and this is not the case in the rest of the article. If there's a reason then obviously that's fine but I'm happy to change it if needs be. User:SamTrev 20:05, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

There is no good reason I can think of, other than people feel quite familiar to them after all these years.--Crestville 10:30, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Good NewsWeek

Should be added that this was a subject of a lawsuit from Hat Trick Productions. I don't want to add without a reference, so hopefully someone else will find one.

Inappropriate tone

I added the {{inappropriate tone}} tag and would like to explain. There are many instances of unencyclopedic language, e.g. "she proceeded to give Ian Hislop five points straight off the bat." straight off the bat is not formal language. Neither is "But it could have been worse" "Naturally, the HIGNFY team took great delight in flouting this directive" "Occasionally, or, in other words, if there's time to fill" and regarding the famous News of the World episode "Merton cried out 'This has been one news story of the week but the one I'm really interested in, Angus, is'" when in fact he said it at a pretty normal volume.

Also POV problems, a Michael Winner comment is called "regrettable" and the Hamiltons "managed to come through pretty well"

Finally are pure, silly jokes really at home here? "In a recent episode, the panel were discussing gay marriages and Paul turned to Ian, saying, "We're still on for the 20th, right?" "So far, Paul's theories have included that Boris has been knitted, he is a glove puppet from the neck down, he requires batteries and there is an electric current going through his chair to wake him up when he slows down." See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not

The article is also heaving with unsourced information - I know it's all true because I've listened to the DVD commentary too - but not everyone can be expected to know this. Mark83 20:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Choice moments/notable incidents

I've removed a lot of minor, non-notable jokes and incidents. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Any incident which we describe must have had a major impact or have historical significance, this should not be a list of every joke. For example a joke about KFC selling "troughs" of french fries. I found it funny but is not significant. I've left things like the Thatcher swallowing joke - Merton said on the DVD commentary that is was at that point one of the most talked about moments. Another example is the Piers Morgan thing. It is important not only because it was one of the worst performance by anyone in television history, but also because it's significant - the editor of a major newspaper responsible for reporting on people's private lives demanding his privacy. Mark83 00:17, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

"Intrusive about a woman's body"

"Hislop was, afterwards, criticised for being intrusive about a woman's body, although the actual recording shows that he did not say anything on that subject."

What on earth is that supposed to mean? Criticised by whom, exactly? 217.155.20.163 00:54, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Some newspaper--Crestville 16:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Pot Noodle

Maybe I'm going a bit too far back, but does anyone remember the episode where they spent half (or near half) the show coming up with new names for Pot Noodles. In a HIGNFY book that I got last (2006) Christmas, it says that the company gave the show a vast amount of Pot Noodles because of the free publicity. I was wondering, should this be in the "notable moments" section? --Skully Collins ^Edits 14:06, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

• It happened quite recently, as far as I remember. I'm not bothered about its invlusion because I didn't find it very funny, but it's probably as notable as much of the other stuff in that section. Also, we could probably do with that book and the other two in the References section being properly listed, maybe after the DVDs/Videos in the article.--PaulTaylor 15:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

The Maxwells (I was tempted to use "Maxwell House as the header, but I won't)

Help

I am trying to write articles about Ian Maxwell and Kevin Maxwell, nothing litigious, however one has been deleted and the other is up for deletion. Why does Wikipedia not have biographies of these two very significant businessmen?

Can anyone help. Johnnybriggs 03:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't know so much about them, so I can only help by stating the significants of these two individulas in Britian in the early 90s, involved as they were in their father's biggest scandal and the defendnats in one of the biggset British litigations ever over the mirror pension fund. They are not just non-noteable children of Robert Maxwell, they are destestable arseholes in their own right. If you need any advice on how to make this come across in their articles, please contact me.--Crestville 10:36, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

re:they are being deleted because they is no information on them. Read the sources at the botom and use the information to form full articles on them.--Crestville 10:37, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Surely if someone meets WP:NOTE it doesn't matter if there is a full encyclopedia or a stub. A full article is good, a stub is bad, but neither should be deleted. Request for expansion is fine, but deletion could fall into disruption to make a point. -- Mark83 12:04, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Paula Yates

I've changed the bit about Paula Yates, the truth is she didn't know what was going to happen in the show; this wasn't an act. I remember reading in one or two newspapers that Paula collapsed after the show and people just stepped over her, Michael was called for and took her home in tears. I do try and get all the facts before I make an edit, but this is something I know by heart. Thanks (INXS-Girl 14:40, 05 April 2007 (UTC)

What you know by heart, unfortunately does not count in Wikipedia. Your comments must be verifiable. ⇒ SWATJester ^{On Belay!} 00:31, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

"Sailing close to the wind"

Is this an encyclopaedic phrase? Smonnie 15:17, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

No, it's a non-standard, non nautical phrase meaning, "to do something that is dangerous or only just legal or acceptable," much-like commenting on a Wikipedia page without using a "handle".

Also: I notice this page hasn't got a Wikiquote page. Perhaps initiating one would help with future libel actions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.120.149.212 (talk) 12:34, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Rewrite of article

I thought I'd let you all know that I'm planning a fairly heavy set of edits to this article in the next 72 hours to try to restore an encyclopaedic tone, and to remove the large, unnecessary lists of information. In particular, I think that a lot of the "notable" moments are going to be trimmed out - a running commentary of every hilarious thing is not necessary. I think if you want that included, you will have to write separate stub articles on each of the episodes and include the information there.

If anyone wants to see how its progressing in the meantime, its at User:Fritzpoll/HIGNFY_Redraft. Any comments to my talk page, please. --Fritzpoll 20:05, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

As long as the show isn't referred to as HIGNFY throughout, that's fine with me. Nothing cheapens an article more than laziness. - Dudesleeper · Talk 20:15, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

No, that's just to make the page easier for me to type out - it will be referred to as "Have I Got News for You" or "the programme" --Fritzpoll 21:30, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I wasn't referring to the article in your userspace. I was referring to this. - Dudesleeper · Talk 00:05, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Is another rewrite in order? There are still too many 'notable moments' and the tone is not encyclopedic throughout significant portions. Also links to other articles are used badly. 80.195.80.148 14:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe the only way forward is for comments about episodes to be put in the relevant bit in List of Have I Got News For You episodes. Would take some editing though. Georgethe23rd 20:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Notable moments & running gags

This section is too long, and filled with a lot of non-notable content. Unless there are (reasonable) objections, I'll be cutting it right down within the next couple of hours, at which point this talk page section can become a place for those that disagree to put forward a good reason to revert my edit. Appologies for the short notice, but tonight's a good night for me to do some serious editing, and I reasoned that some notice was better than none :). _TheIslander 18:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Add to that the Notable Moments section, for exactly the same reason. _TheIslander 18:54, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Right, I've done a bit. To be honest, I think I've been quite lenient, and really a few more from each section should go, but I'll leave that to someone else to do. _TheIslander 18:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

References

This article needs more references to it, in particular references to certain episodes. You may want to use the citation templates in order to provide some help. ISD (talk) 14:30, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Deayton's sacking

To the anon who seems adamant that there was only one round of tabloid allegations about Angus Deayton, please check the dates of the BBC News sources quoted. The first occurrence was in May 2002 in Series 23 (which led to Paul Merton's News of the World t-shirt, etc.), while the second was the following October in Series 24 (when he was sacked after hosting two episodes). Please do not revert again. Thanks. Chris 42 (talk) 01:13, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm having a hard time seeing the relevance of including the word "adulterous" in brackets in the paragraph about Deaton getting sacked. It looks more like a sly dig than relevant information to me Madashell (talk) 10:41, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Edited / unedited?

The section on the right hand side states that the 30 minute version of HIGNFY is "edited" and the 40 minute version is "unedited". This could do with being changed as both versions are in fact edited. This can be confirmed by the actual unedited versions of the Boris Johnson episodes (The Full Boris) which are actually a good hour or more in length which means that the 40 minute "Have I Got A Bit More News For You" episodes do still have plenty of the recorded content trimmed from them. I'd therefore propose changing this to something like "standard" for the 30 minutes version and maybe "extended" for the 40 minute version or something? Trippynet (talk) 11:54, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Very good point. I've now amended the infobox. :-) Chris 42 (talk) 11:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Original Research

A good 2/3 of this article appears to be original research and fancruft. Like all of the sections Notable moments, Running gags and Frequent targets. I see from the talk above that it appears to be a regular problem. Anyone object to it going? --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 21:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

It's definitely not encylopedic and should be drastically edited. Unfortunately I fear that like Top Gear it's likely to return to its fan-boy style within days. All power to your elbow if you do manage to spring-clean. TrulyBlue (talk) 22:06, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd be willing (if anyone wants me to) to try and add references to the episodes in which many of these events take place if necessary. That way any content should be far easier to verify. I don't think that the sections should be deleted however.Trippynet (talk) 19:11, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

What makes a moment 'notable' though? To me, that would need to be reported/ commented in the media; if you have those sort of sources then fine. I don't think the issue with running gags is their verifiability, more whether they're notable. Same goes for targets. Ged UK (talk) 21:06, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. There are notable things mentioned in the article (by Wikipedia's definition of the word) that could have cites added with a bit of work. But all the "Merton/Hislop said something funny" stuff added to the article clearly aren't notable. It's notable that Paul Merton is a comedian and many people find him very funny, but notability of the specific examples are simply points of views and original research by individual editors. It's all great stuff, but belongs on a fan-site, not an encyclopaedia. What I intend to do is a bit of sourcing of cites for what seems most likely to be notable to me, but otherwise remove the rest. If anyone can cite any of the rest, all to the good. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 11:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Rounds

I'm not sure how relevent this is, but there is no mention of the rounds within the show. I think a new section should be added including this. The types of round could be added(such as the missing words round) and then what happens in each of them (such as headlines from obscure guest publications). Then further to this a little bit of the history about the round, like when it first appeared etc. should be added. A good source for information about it is here [6] Andypandy2020 (talk) 18:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I seem to recall there was a Rounds section, or it was in the format section. I can't remember what happened to it, though I think it may have had something to do with the vagaries of the rounds. I'm also not sure how reliable a source H2G2 is. Ged UK (talk) 19:39, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I understand that there is some variance in the rounds and some occur only once, so how about the section is called "recurring rounds" or something on those lines instead? Also, H2G2 is part of the BBC, so I think we can trust it as a reliable reference. Andypandy2020 (talk) 19:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

It's only hosted by the Beeb, it's written by 'normal people', just like Wikipedia, so if the info isn't sourced, then I don't think it would meet our requirements here. Ged UK (talk) 20:16, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Point taken about H2G2, so I've had a look for other sources and found this one [7]. Do you think it is suitable as a source instead? Andypandy2020 (talk) 20:26, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Looks OK to me. Ged UK (talk) 20:30, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Wonderful, I've made the change. Do you think it's ok? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andypandy2020 (talk • contribs) 20:57, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Not bad. I've made a couple of changes to it as the odd-one-out round traditionally comes third rather than second. I've also added a mention for the Wheel of News which sometimes replaces the picture spin quiz. I've also mentioned the tabloid headline round which traditionally was the second round up until a few years ago. These details are all verifiable from the UKGameShows source. I've referenced it a second time after the "Whiteley/Countdown" detail.Trippynet (talk) 19:48, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Original Research again

I've removed the same stuff that was discussed and removed a few months back. Particularly the stuff from the sections Notable moments, Running gags and Frequent targets. Before anyone adds them back in could they discuss it here please, and justify why it shouldn't be considered original research. Additions to Wikipedia should be notable by Wikipedia's definitions. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 19:44, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I've removed this material yet again. Would 77.96.110.37 please either provide some justification for this material and explain why it isn't [WP:OR|original research]] or stop adding it.--Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 12:28, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Jack Dee discrepancy

Jack Dee is listed as having appeared as a guest host both 5 and 6 times. I have no idea which is right, so I haven't touched it, but someone should. 84.65.147.127 (talk) 17:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

This should be added somewhere

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,365645,00.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1025670/Have-I-Got-A-Court-Case-For-You-The-man-fell-sofa-watching-hit-TV-ended-arrest.html William Ortiz (talk) 10:49, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Why? The notability, if any, would be appropriate to an article about policing. The fact that he was watching HIGNFY isn't the significant part of the story for me. Ged UK (talk) 11:25, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Any ideas what article then? William Ortiz (talk) 07:24, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Maybe Law enforcement in the United Kingdom, but I don't know whether the editors there will feel it fits there either. Maybe worth a try. Ged UK (talk) 07:27, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Guest presenters

The whole section is just a reformatted list of List of Have I Got News For You episodes, and it's only going to get longer and more messy as the series' continue. I agree with putting the most often guest presenters up, and maybe the bit about appearing as a guest after appearing as a host, but why do we need the list of people who have only appeared on it once, when their names are already here? Any agreement to scrapping it? LicenseFee (talk) 21:56, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

My suggestion would be to remove the '1 appearance as host' part if it gets much longer. Leave the rest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.48.236 (talk) 22:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

2010 Series?

I know there's a source for the show being "expanded into the UK equivalent of The Onion," but I hear there are plans to keep the show going into 2010, maybe later. Does anyone have a source for this? I can't seem to find one. It would useful to put on the main page so people know it's still going and didn't end this month.Cyrenaic (talk) 13:32, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

There will be a new series, Hattrick has already announced ticket being released in march [8]. User:Allard Tuesday 12th January 2010 at 19:57 European Central Time.In —Preceding unsigned comment added by Allard (talk • contribs) 18:57, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Twitter feed

Just to say that since March 2010 there has been an official Have I Got News For You twitter feed which is here: @bbcHIGNFY

The show promotes chat on twitter by putting a graphic of the hashtag #HIGNFY at the front of each show to encourage viewers to debate. (This has been running since the Autumn series 2010). During the week and between series, Hat Trick posts topical jokes and encourage followers to take part in missing word rounds.

The twitter feed is edited by the show's executive producer Richard Wilson. Hattrickdigital (talk) 08:33, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Something's amiss here

In the "Format" section, we have a paragraph that says:

Over an hour's worth of material is recorded for each 30-minute programme on Thursday evenings for broadcast on Friday, allowing the programme to remain topical while the BBC's lawyers have time to request cuts of potentially slanderous material. "No reviewer could possibly review it in that time. We started off with an audience of two million, and somebody might have mentioned it to their friend, and then it sort of built up a momentum of its own."

This makes no sense at all. The paragraph starts out by talking about how much material is recorded, what is cut out, and ends in a (presumably validly) cited but unattributed quote that looks as if it has to do with how quickly the audience built when the show was starting out.

It's a total non-sequitur, or at least so it appears. Can someone with access to the context to the quoted bit come up with some way to make sense out of this? 192.35.35.34 (talk) 02:32, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Introduction fails to describe overall purpose of show

Introduction fails to describe overall purpose of show. After reading it, I am still not sure what the show is about.

CrocodilesAreForWimps (talk) 13:28, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Do Panel Shows have an overall purpose other than just to entertain? Narom (talk) 14:41, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Purpose - To put forward the BBC's leftist agenda in the form of "Precision Engineered" comedy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.115.8.188 (talk) 15:42, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Angus Deayton

It was revealed in the Press that Deayton got £50,000 an episode whereas the contestants got just £12,500 an episode. The bitter and snide remarks started immediately against him and when stories of Deayton's sex and drugs came out, the four contestants attacked him mercilessly at every opportunity so that in the end, the BBC had no choice but to get rid of him. (178.236.117.122 (talk) 16:43, 5 May 2013 (UTC))

Revealed by who in what?

Running gags

• Robert Kilroy-Silk's "share or shaft" quote
• Eamonn Holmes weight jokes (not too many of those recently)
• Liz Truss's cheese quote and open pork markets in Beijing seem to be on their way to becoming 'running gags' also

2.30.100.89 (talk) 12:43, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Have I Got News for You. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091201165659/http://www.nightlisteners.com/public/wait-wait-don%E2%80%99t-tell-me%E2%80%A6/ to http://www.nightlisteners.com/public/wait-wait-don%E2%80%99t-tell-me%E2%80%A6/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:33, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Notable moments

The "Notable moments" section, which was and is the target of at least one redirect (The Rt. Hon. Tub of Lard MP) was removed by user:WikipediaUserCalledChris in January this year, apparently without discussion, using the edit summary "Original research surely?" [9]. I don't agree with this removal, as these are indeed all notable moments from the series - Roy Hattersley/Tub of Lard, The Hamilton's getting brown envelopes of cash, Boris Johnson's appearances, Angus Deyton's last episode as presenter and Nicky Morgan/leather handbag. While it may be original research to describe them as the most notable or some such like that, I do think the section (as a concept, not necessarily in identical format) deserves to be restored in some form. Thryduulf (talk) 13:16, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

The problem with sections like these is there is no clear, sourceable, criteria for determining what moments are notable. So it comes down to an editor's opinion, which is the original research. If you can devise a manner of doing this, then maybe it would work. But otherwise what happens is these sections just keep growing with increasing trivia.

What would be better is if the "notable moments" were properly incorporated into a history of the show, with proper context and sources demonstrating what exactly made them "notable". --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:23, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Notability of Farage-joke police involement

Edits to the Controversy section have removed the note on UKIP logging a police case against the show as below.

In April 2015, the UK Independence Party complained to Kent Police over a false statement about candidate Nigel Farage, which would be in breach of electoral law. The police did not investigate, stating "The matter has been reviewed by officers but there's no evidence of any offences and there will be no further action.".

To my mind this meets all of the requirements for notability as in Wikipedia:Notability in that it:

• had significant coverage, the reference being a national news source;
• comes from a reliable source, the BBC, along with a quote from Kent Police;
• has wide sources - a google search finds stories in almost every major national newspaper;
• is independent of those involved - independently edited, and many independent sources (see the majority of press coverage);
• has direct quotes and is not presumed.

It also apoears to relate to an attempt by a national political party to pursue a criminal case against the show, and thus is I'd argue is probably relevant for a encyclopaedia entry (unless anyone knows different, I'm just going by what I'm reading?)

I beleive it should stay, but rather than get into an edit war with the editor that's removing it I'd like to gain some concensus. What do other folks think? Lkchild (talk) 22:45, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

For me, it is the "police involvement" issue more than anything else. The police specifically chose not to be involved. The media made a big hype over it during an election cycle, probably a slow news day. No investigation, no consequences, a big fat pile of nothing. This page is already overblown with the kind of cruft that I would love to take a weed-whacker to. This is an encyclopedia, not a fan page. Scr★pIron^IV 23:14, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

If you were not even interested enough in the incident to describe what it actually was, that's a good indication that it's not worth including. I added the text describing what actually happened, but the removal of the whole thing is better. Something the police investigated could be of note; something they didn't is not. 124.159.170.92 (talk) 06:46, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Keep in mind this one didn't originate with me - I just came to correct it - I was mid-edit when it was removed. On reading the actual reference (and others) they did investigate but determined there was no case to be had. I'm not arguing this as a fan, just as an interested party. This, to me, is a significant event, but if no other editors agree the concensus is with you. Lkchild (talk) 19:36, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Have I Got News for You. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110608045207/http://www.offthetelly.co.uk/?page_id=338 to http://www.offthetelly.co.uk/?page_id=338
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.err.ee/press/pressiteated_2008/teletaip_tuleb_tagasi/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:40, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Hattersley

I've removed again the addition of the Hattersley episode. While it is common knowledge that the episode occurred, and a source discussing it shouldn't be hard to find, we most definitely need a good cite for the claim that Hattersely considered litigation. "Reportedly" isn't good enough. And that's before consideration about what makes this "controversial" and suitable for inclusion in this section. Where was the controversy? --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 14:30, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Ian Hislop's Attendance Record

Currently, the article says "On rare occasions Hislop and Merton have been absent from the programme" and "During this period, Hislop - who would be the longest serving member of the three on the programme since its premiere — was forced to be absent from one episode in 1994 due to appendicitis." I believe this is untrue, and that Hislop has never missed an episode. As I recall he checked himself out of the hospital to do the show despite his appendicitis, and had an appendectomy immediately after filming concluded. Given that level of devotion to being there, it seems churlish at best to claim he wasn't. A potential source to cite here is the Radio Times (https://www.radiotimes.com/news/tv/comedy/2017-10-06/have-i-got-news-for-you-15-facts/): "4. Paul Merton, Clive Anderson and Frank Skinner have occupied all three roles on the show — guest presenter, team captain, and panellist. But Ian Hislop is the only person to have appeared in every single episode, even during a bout of appendicitis in 1994." Also from the BBC (https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2012/hignfy-hosts): "Ian Hislop is the only person to have appeared in every episode - and in front of every guest host - despite suffering from a burst appendix shortly before one 1994 edition and having to go to hospital immediately after the recording." While this doesn't fully support my memory (neither includes the checking out of hospital part), it does tend to confirm that he did not miss the show... as does watching the episode. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.155.70.240 (talk) 14:20, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

I've removed the statement and put in your source. The source previously used in fact suggests the opposite of what was claimed in the article, and your source is much more clear about things. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 14:37, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Credit Opening Theme

It would be pertinent to include that the opening theme was composed by George Webley, as it hasn't changed significantly since the series was created - I actually visited the page to find that information myself.

It could be included in the See Also section with Triffic Films. Fohfuu (talk) 12:40, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

The "Odd One Out" round

In parallel with the Wiki entry that gives a few details about each & every episode, I'd like to do the same for the 'Odd One Out' (OOO) round. Over the years, I've found this to be fascinating, producing the odd pearl (usually from Ian Hislop), such as the Norwegian Environment Minister calling John Gummer a "Drittsek" which is their word for a "Shitbag". There was a website that gave details up to about series 21, but that site appears to have closed down. That same site also had a few errors, relating to attaching a round to the wrong episode. At the moment, I'm having to resort to YouTube, but it doesn't show all episodes. To further complicate matters, some 30-minute episodes of HIGNFY didn't show the OOO, but it was included in the extended version of the same show. Is there anyone who knows if there still is such a site? I tried asking Hattrick, but they never responded. Similarly, is there a discussion forum on the 'net that deals with HIGNFY? Facebook is no good as the HIGNFY group seem to specialise in digging up dirt and eliciting opinion(s).

Thanks in advance

Taff Hewitt (talk) 18:06, 10 March 2023 (UTC)