Talk:Top Gear Australia

Australia: Television / Motorsport Low‑importance

	Australia portal Top Gear Australia is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian television (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian motorsport (assessed as High-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[BMW X5 (E70)#BMW X5 M (2010)-|BMW X5 M]]

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Bankstown airport?[edit]

The test track does not look like Bankstown Airport to me. Any idea where it actually is?

Vombatus (talk) 10:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed[edit]

I have fixed it. One of the hangars had "Dent Aviation" on it. A quick search revealled that they are based at Camden Airport. Bankstown Airport would be too busy for a couple of blokes to drive around and be silly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spectre1978 (talk • contribs) 11:01, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The studios are at Bankstown but the test track is at Camden. Jackelfive (talk) 03:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TGA Template[edit]

I made a new template for this version of the show featuring it's own segments rather than the UK version with only one link to this article. It is a bit plain, but what do you all think?

Beamerized (talk) 12:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. I think we should use it. 59.167.63.161 (talk) 12:34, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should definitely use it but I also think we should keep the main TG template on the page too - albeit in its collapsed format. Dick G (talk) 04:15, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshot request[edit]

One web resolution screenshot (e.g. 500px wide) of the three presenters would be allowed under fair use. Something similar to this. ShipFan (talk) 14:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the bot removed the example as there's no free use rationale for using it on a talk page! Here is a direct link to the image: Image:TopGearHosts.jpg. I agree this sort of web resolution image would be good to illustrate the hosts of TGA. 203.7.140.3 (talk) 03:46, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Second season announced![edit]

Regardless of the flogging it's getting on some blogs, it did well in the ratings and the media buyers love it. A second season has been green lighted.[1] Also announced that Jack Thompson will appear later in the current season. 203.7.140.3 (talk) 06:47, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone got a link regarding and confirming this? Because otherwise we should close the 'current run' section. 121.217.66.216 (talk) 11:42, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TGA causes traffic jam[edit]

Apparently Warren Brown and Steve Pizzati caused a traffic jam in Toorak today while testing a Toorak Tractor - driving a Massey Ferguson slowly down Toorak Road! Should this be mentioned or wait until it airs? 203.7.140.3 (talk) 08:16, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it has been reported in a verifiable source - preferably with a web link - then it can be put in the article.Dick G (talk) 08:26, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Herald Sun has video online.[2] It shows they were driving a tractor through Toorak but doesn't quite show a traffic jam. ShipFan (talk) 11:19, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, have put it in new section 'Stunts'. Expect there'll be plenty more to come... Dick G (talk) 11:49, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Episode Titles[edit]

Right now in the episode list the titles are simply the season and episode number, which are elsewhere in the chart. Unless there are other names that can be substituted, I don't think there is any particular reason to have a title column. ce1984 (talk) 18:32, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be retained as is. It obviously uses the same template as List of Top Gear episodes. 203.7.140.3 (talk) 01:59, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Ce1984, series/episode numbering is already present, and unless the episodes are given titles there is no real need to repeat information already there. Bentos (talk) 10:10, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the Series and Ep Numbers are fine, and theres no need to have duplicate info. DazzaJay (talk) 10:47, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citations of http://www.tvtonight.com.au[edit]

Please add the full citation and link to the actual article being quoted. Linking to the front page of the site is not helpful. ShipFan (talk) 08:29, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The numbers are in the ratings section. The article text is an objective description of those numbers. Greg Locock (talk) 21:43, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting error?[edit]

What is wrong with the lists for the power laps and the celebrity laps on this page? It always goes 1,3,4,etc. 2 is always missing. Does anyone know how this can be fixed? jackelfive (talk) 11:06, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ratings trendline[edit]

A linear trend is no longer accurate or useful. The mean audience across the whole season was 654,625 (σ = 129,971). The overall viewing figures are fairly consistent. 6 of the 8 episodes (75%) are within 1σ, significantly better than the expected 68.27%. All but the premiere (88% of episodes) are within 1.645σ, as close as possible given the small sample size to the expected 90%. Thus the premiere is the only outlier in the ratings. 203.7.140.3 (talk) 04:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of outliers is generally a bad idea. However I will accept that it is OK to remove it from the trend, IF all references to the opening program's viewing figures are also removed from the article. Either it is an outlier or it isn't. Also, just because something is at the extreme of the predicted scatter doesn't invalidate it. "All but the premiere (88% of episodes) are within 1.645σ, as close as possible given the small sample size to the expected 90%. Thus the premiere is the only outlier in the ratings." suggests that we would expect extreme values like that, doesn't it? I'd actually be inclined to use the SD of the TGUK numbers for any statistical test. Greglocock (talk) 05:23, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the trendline was almost spot on , in retrospect. So what's the new statistical theory to explain the rapid and linear decline in the audience? Or maybe i was right. Greglocock (talk) 04:17, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Templates[edit]

Have restored the main TG template. As a navigational tool for the overarching TG concept it is appropriate to keep the main template in this article which, in effect, covers a franchise of the original show. Moreover the main TG template also links to the Aussie version which is persuasive in itself. Dick G (talk) 23:43, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stig Identity[edit]

What is considered a reliable third party source? Would a newspaper article be considered a reliable third party source or is it still speculation. The article in question is http://theage.drive.com.au/motor-news/oz-stig-unmasked-20130426-2ii0p.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrHyde (talk • contribs) 11:44, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]