Talk:The Late Late Show/Archive 1

Irish pride

Kicking off with the fact that's the worlds longest running show, and then mentioning again and again that this is an "flagship production", seems a little over indulgent to me. (I have to admit, never saw this show though).

--93.125.182.146 (talk) 05:30, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jordan's drunken appearance

I remember seeing Jordan (Katie Price) on the Late Late hammered and making a fool or herself. Tommy Tiernan was also a guest and got a great response from the crowd. Worth a mention, maybe on Jordan's listing as a famous guest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.39.56.112 (talk) 17:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2005 edit

I looked up this article to find out more about the Annie Murphy appearance on the show. It is barely mentioned. In my opinion it is the most infamous episode and her treatment was very controversial. Perhaps somebody could add this item. It was a defining moment. thanks. John 14/7/05

This page has had the The added into the title to correct a mistake in expression (the show is titled The Late Late Show, not the Late Late Show). When one speaks of a correspondent from The Irish times, one should say "the The Irish Times correspondent". The same applies to this. Just because the word is duplicated in the title doesn't mean it can be left out. Kwekubo 15:46, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Good move. I kept meaning to do it but then kept forgetting. It was originally named after a series of ferocious battles elsewhere among the anti-The campaigners who seemed to want to remove any The no matter how necessary. I just gave up and left out the word, which was a mistake. So common sense wins! Well done. Gaybo will be proud! :-) FearÉIREANN 18:50, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Might be worth mentioning the infamous appearance by Peter Brooke, the Northern Ireland Secretary, on the show, which led to Brooke's resignation. Exile 19:09, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The Storm in a teacup about "Lesbian Nuns" also merits a mention 87.113.67.110 00:31, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Geldof

The use of "Sir" with Bob Geldof is improper as he does not hold British citizenship (and this is a requirement for using the title irrespective of been conferred with the honour), though he is commonly referred improperly as such. Djegan 12:59, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

POV

This page has way too much POV (esp about Gaybo) and a lot of it will probably need to be rewritten, or at least gone through with an extra fine toothcomb. JOHN COLLISON | (Ludraman) 20:00, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Is it fair to say The Dunphy Show bombed? it averaged over 220,000 viewers a week. -- Lochaber 14.47, 04 Jan 2005 (UTC)

If it set itself that as a target it would have been rightly regarded as a success. However Eamo as usual shot his mouth off, expecting 400,000+, to defeat Kenny and the LLS, to pull the biggest guests, get mass advertising and become the Friday night chat show. Instead he got an average of less than half his target , failed to come close to Kenny over its run, found big guests with the odd exception picking the LLS over the DS, failed to pull in the expected advertising and was axed after half a season. By all the criteria set by Eamon it bombed. He had been strongly advised by friends publicly and privately not to hype up a show that was newly born, and crucially not to try a head to head with Pat. If he had listened to his friends his show would still be going now. But, as though of us who have ever worked with Eamon know, he is not skilled at listening to advice.

In contrast Ryan Tubridy played it carefully and now has a spectacular hit on his hands with a show that doesn't go head to head with the LLS and started quietly rather than being over-hyped. But then I am biased as Ryan is a friend of mine, and Pat is as dull off camera as he is on it. His excellent radio skills simply don't transfer to television. FearÉIREANN 18:23, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The NPOV tag has been on this article for a long time, and it looks like some pretty major changes have been done to the article. Is there still a POV problem? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 21:47, August 19, 2005 (UTC)

Music

The correct wording of the closing song was 'it started on The Late Late Show'. I have corrected this and added a reference to it and also to original opening signature tune. TonyK 12:45, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Longest running chat show "in Ireland"

Right down to my history books in third year, to the IMDB, they all say that the Late Late, at 42 solid years, is the longest running chat show in -the world-. Now, I know we're akin to slightly overblown claims in Ireland a lot - "O'Connell Street is the widest street in Europe", etc, etc - but I think this one might actually be true. --Kiand 21:54, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I know that the Tonight show is older, but it wasn't a chat show when it started; the Late Late always has been. --Kiand 21:56, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

According to the The Tonight Show article, it started off as a variety program in 1954, then was revamped as a news program for the first half of 1957, then was reverted to a talk/variety show in July 1957 hosted by Jack Paar. I believe that interviews, usually of celebrities, was the main focus of Jack Paar's "Tonight", possibly giving the lie to the claim that "The Late Late Show" is older. Then again, I might be wrong.SWalkerTTU 05:22, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That information wasn't in the Tonight Show article at the time I wrote my comments there. "in Europe" might be a decent extension anyway... --Kiand 05:40, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In relation to the removal of the "longest running chat show" statement I wonder has anyone bothered to simply google the matter? Yes, it is well-known that little Ireland does indeed possess the longest running chat show as can be verified by this simple action which on the first page alone throws up everything from discussion boards to an article from the official Eurovision website. It is clear that some people have difficulty with this fact but as it is fact there is no reason why there should be a continued belief otherwise and a persistent desire to remove it repeatedly. --➨♀♂Candlewicke _S^T_# :) 22:16, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The complaints are valid given that, you know, the Tonight Show in the US is far older. -Fartnog Buttstinkle April 21st, 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.184.200.31 (talk) 20:59, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You'll have to tell the BBC that. And Eurovision (above source). --can dle •wicke 12:57, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but just because the BBC makes an offhand remark like that doesn't make it the undisputed case. At best it's a contender, not the definitive holder of "World's Longest Running", because the Tonight Show (in one form or another) HAS been running longer. --CDiddles (talk) 04:52, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The sources say that it is the longest running chat show. If you are not a chat show today, you chat show was not been running today. A better source would probably be the Guinness Book of Records though, not that I know if that has an entry with them. Longest running CHAT SHOW. "Longest running" = without a break. Chat show = chat show. That is pretty definitive unless you want to read something into it. Just looking at the Tonight show article, does it not have more episodes than any other chat show? It seems to say that Jay Leno made over 200 episodes a year his first run on average. Pity it's not the longest running chat show huh. x) ~ R.T.G 10:44, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comparative

From Wiktionary:

Adverb:
running (not comparable)

(informal) consecutively; in a row

Mom's strawberry jam won the blue ribbon at the Holland County Fair three years running.

Noun:

Alternative name of talk show.

The Tonight Show has not always been The Tonight Show and it has not always been a chat show. Does that compute that The Tonight Show is a longer running chat show than RTEs the Late Late Show? No. What do the sources say?

Peter Brooke

I remember that one so vividly. Gaybo maliciously goaded and prodded that poor stupid upper-class twit and put him in an untenable situation. Ricky Gervais couldn't have made it more excruciating. Ben-w 09:12, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I remeber it as well watching it from Belfast was painful more because of Gaybo's goading Brooke into singing - and the idiot didn't have the sense to decline - not to mention the silly song he sang - it couldn't have been worse for him if he had sung the Sash or Soldiers' Song! Lorna Luft the younger daughter of Judy Garland was also on the same show and sang (very well) but the pained look on her face demonstraed how uncomfortable the situation was - Gaybo also tried to goad her into confirming some gossip about her sister performing with Princess Diana but Lorna being more expereinced with this type of treatment was able to fend him off with non-commital replies but Brooke fell for it hook line and sinker. The appearance forced his resignation as it gave Unioniusts the amunition they needed to get rid of him as they did with every Secretary of State with teh exception of Mo Molem that showed the slightest leaning toward power sharing or equality for Catholics.81.99.66.38 13:01, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Trevaskis

Not disputing the veracity of the assertion (I don't recall one way or the other), but can anyone source a reference to the suicide of Brian Trevaskis? An audio clip of his second appearance is availabe here: http://www.scoilnet.ie/lookathistory/Video.aspx?FolderId=1&Id=541&ref=4 (the audio doesnt appear to work ???)

I would like to remove this unless there is clear evidence - and I will do so unless there is an objection.87.194.83.202 (talk) 02:37, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nov 2006 Incident

Anyone know what this was about ? Is there any audio/video of the incident online ? 87.113.67.110 00:31, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Try here or here 212.2.174.182 01:32, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am the man featured in those clips. Spaingy 20:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It might be worth mentioning that the same intruder was re-arrested after he crashed a Nissan Micra into the front entrance of the RTE building a week later. http://www.irishpost.co.uk/news/story.asp?j=5011&cat=news 87.198.146.21 08:05, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Image

What happened to the image of Gay being unhappy with the show's changes? 195.137.108.161 23:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

O'Reilly Case

I moved the account of the O'Reilly case out of the Gay Byrne section and into the Pat Kenny section. In the process, I made it a bit more concise and removed references to persons by first name. EmmetCaulfield 19:26, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Der106.jpg

Image:Der106.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 18:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Der107.jpg

Image:Der107.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 18:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name Change

Any objection to changing this article's name to The Late Late Show (RTÉ TV series) and reworking The Late Late Show into a disambiguation page? 24.235.73.22 (talk) 06:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image used in article

Is this the best image we can find? --HighKing (talk) 10:39, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup tags

While in a way I can understand why (given the show's "national institution" status), there really is far too much weight given to individual occurrences and guests on the show. While (for example) it might have been mildly notable *at the time* that Kenny got Seinfeld's name wrong, or Jason Byrne ball-hopped an unaware Bill Murray, these occurrences really aren't all that encyclopaedic. In the long-run.

Also, while the varying host styles may be the subject of pub chatter (and may even warrant a few column inches from TV reviewers) is it really worth an entire section to compare Kenny with Byrne? Personally I think it smacks of commentary and introduces WP:NPOV issues. The "list of guests" is also getting way too long and should either be carved out into its own article or summarised to the highlights and a length appropriate for an embedded list. Or both.

These and other issues have been highlighted with cleanup tags for several years now, and - while the article has been modified and "enhanced" in other areas - these issues remain. Any thoughts on a structured approach to addressing - before I make a first stab? Guliolopez (talk) 03:09, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe there is a guestlist which I've come across a few times over the years. However it is in an even more horrendous state than this article and has large gaps from the 1960s-2000s and again for the past few years. I have to say I've heard more mention of the Seinfield incident than the one with Bill Murray. There are definite complications in the history by host approach as it leads to, for example, two separate tribute show sections for the two hosts which could easily be combined. Perhaps the article would be best served with being rewritten entirely and incorporating the more important elements of the current page. Another question is what constitutes a famous or infamous guest? Surely all the guests are famous in some shape or form... what unit can be used to obtain an accurate measurement of fame or infamy? That list regularly misses out on being updated yet all of Friday's guests were added. I can only assume that is because of the heightened interest in Gerry Ryan. Tommy Tiernan probably merits an inclusion for the amount of complaints that follow him around alone but what of the others... they could at least be dated and some explanation given on how they have become famous or infamous. --➨Candlewicke ^{:) Sign/Talk} 00:35, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just thought I'd slip this in here. I heard the "Seinfield" incident mentioned on the radio this morning. By his RTÉ "colleagues" Colm & Jim-Jim on 2fm at precisely 07:13. Perhaps some small evidence that it hasn't been forgotten entirely and that it pops up each time the Toy Show comes around. --➨Candlewicke ^{:) Sign/Talk} 16:58, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Getting worse - not better

Despite being tagged for some time as needing review, this article is actually regressing in a few areas:

WP:INDISCRIMINATE - There is a lot of "random facts" included. For example, the colour of jumpers worn by Byrne or Kenny is without encyclopedic value. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of "facts" - just because something is true doesn't make it notable or encyclopedically important.
WP:EVENT - Same applies to the "notable incidents" references. The article is peppered (often indiscriminately) with references to "notable incidents" - many of which are not notable. I would expect that only incidents which resulted in significant independent coverage, per WP:EVENT, should really be covered. Otherwise there will be a "blow by blow" account of everything that ever happened on the program. Which has no merit. Examples of independently notable events, which got coverage BEYOND the show itself include: the "Bishop and the Nightie Affair", the Paul Stokes incident, etc. Stuff like Kenny mis-pronouncing Seinfeld's name, or Gleeson getting a bit teary eyed are HARDLY front page news! (I would point out that "interesting things" are going to happen on the program. That's the whole point. If "interesting things" aren't happening on the show, then it ceases to have a purpose. That doesn't make every single "interesting occurrence" encyclopedically notable.)
WP:EMBED - List of guests is still too long. And getting longer. As above, it should either be carved out into a separate article. Or summarised.
WP:NPOV - The extensive commentary and style comparisons between the various hosts remains a problem area. Specifically, the references to "praise for Ryan", Kenny's supposed "blandness", etc, are all more suited to a TV Guide review than an encyclopedic article. If nothing else they should be summarised substantially.

Unless these issues can be addressed by the editors who have added them, then I'm going to start cutting a swathe through the article. And summarising/culling anything which substantially fails these guidelines. Guliolopez (talk) 14:11, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I said above I heard the Seinfield incident mentioned on the radio recently. Brendan Gleeson incident was featured in at least one newspaper. Guestlist does need sorting. Desperately. I imagine that with The Toy Show on next weekend my attention may turn to more tidying of the article... otherwise patience is needed... the show is ongoing and constantly creates history... --➨Candlewicke ^{:) Sign/Talk} 18:43, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oddly enough, on the topic of jumpers, PJ Gallagher gave Kenny his last week... not sure that that increases its encyclopedic value though... --➨Candlewicke ^{:) Sign/Talk} 19:05, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Guests

Link here. No time to add it now. --can dle •wicke 15:01, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kenny Live and Tubridy Tonight have been added to the infobox. However, these are only related because they have been presented by presenters of this show. Therefore, could also add The Tubridy Show, Today with Pat Kenny, The Gay Byrne Show, The Frontline, The Meaning of Life, The Full Irish... the list is endless. Does anyone agree they should therefore be removed? --can dle •wicke 08:12, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well... The others you mentioned aren't TV talk shows. But then, any TV talk show on RTÉ should be added. But in this they are related by presenter. Also, if the first two are there, Saturday Live should be there too. I think they should remain though. Cargoking talk 08:46, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added [1] Saturday Live. Cargoking talk 08:49, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Big long guest list

This isn't a party with a really long unreferenced guest list. Pretty much everything that was on that list was unreferenced and goes against all Wikipedia policies. I've removed it. — Cargoking talk 17:08, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good riddance. It was getting on my nerves. --can dle •wicke 23:33, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]