Talk:Karl Pilkington

message: I feel that references to Karl's head resembling an Orange need to be included. References to his head shape are now cultural and outline part of the public's' perception of him. They are no less significant than some of the things he is quoted to have said or indeed, some of his philosophies on life. Perhaps there should be a section entitled 'Karl's Physical Appearance', or something of that nature.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.67.19.105 (talk) 12:32, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree, but I also think that this addition would be incomplete without listing the actual true dimensions of his head.  Possibly with some 3D illustration.  Definitely a "yes" though. 98.194.39.86 (talk) 18:38, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Karl's head shape

message: There are loads of references to this article, which is great, but the same referencing format should be used throughout. Someone should fix that. See the references section. Rob (talk) 19:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: If you're wanting to improve the article, then anyone who listens regularly to the XFM shows, and podcasts -- please make a transcript of them and use them as <ref>'s  so then we can have at least, the date and location which he claims to have said things about his life.
Rather than say "Karl Pilkington grew up x,y,z did x, y, z", use the phrasing "According to XFM radio shows, Pilkington claims that he was ... continuation sentence ... etc ...etc [Reference here]". If there's something, which will occur often, which will sound absolutely surreal, then reference it within the paragraph to a quote, or if even better -- use the guardian unlimited interviews, and some others on ricky's website.  J O  R D A N [talk ] 12:11, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  No no no no no no.  WP is or at least SHOULD BE about truth, above all else.  You are wrong.  Probably a lawyer, no doubt.  Adherence to the law while blatantly ignoring the clear intent of the law is nothing more than a case of willful ignorance.  And there's no place in WP for that approach. If you can't contribute, don't.  But please don't degrade this site for others.  98.194.39.86 (talk) 18:42, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attention to those willing to improve the article 

message: What were the comments Russell Brand made to Karl to lead to his leaving the show?
- I dunno, but I'd love to hear the story of why he left. Russel Brand does come across as an massive ego! - Treasurebum-
I heard the comments had something to do with Karl's relationship with Suzanne, his girlfriend of 11 yeards. Apparently they are no longer together.
:He still talks about a relationship with Suzanne in the present tense on the latest audible podcasts (Season 3), so perhaps it was just speculation in the absence of any concrete reason? --Durzel 10:57, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe the issue was that they had planned to do the BBC 6 Music show together but Karl Pilkington was unable to make the move due to pre-existing contractual obligations around the Ricky Gervais podcasts. Matt Morgan was brought in to replace him. AulaTPN 12:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, though he did do 2 or 3 shows, pretty good stuff, and Russell comes across quite well too, on his radio show (at least the ones I've heard with Karl) he's not at all the way he is on TV, much more calm and makes pretty much sense.--Hst20 12:57, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Russell Brand comments

message: This is an almost total cut and paste from http://www.rickygervais.com/karlpilkington.php
:Quote from rickygervais.com "This page is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Karl Pilkington". You may redistribute this page, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the GFDL"
----I think it was the other way round actually, they acknowledge the article is from Wikipedia on there --Eddwardo 10:38, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Mistaken anonymous editor

message: ---- Nice work on the entry there Rich, I've still got a host of shows to get through but you've added some of the stuff I was going to add anyway. Still got stuff on Zoe Harris, Mrs. Matthews and Re-educating Karl to come. MitchellStirling 00:01 17 January 2006 (UTC)
:: Thanks for the compliment. I'm sure theres a lot more to be added, and work needed on structure too. What is interesting is that someone has added a box entitled. "This article does not make a clear distinction between fact and fiction." Which is fair enough, but I shall remove if people are happy to see it removed. I assume some of Karl's statements are just too hard to believe for some people! Or it might be making a point with relation to citation (i.e. when did Karl say what and when). I don't know. It would be very time consuming to go through each show and record what date each thing was said. A bit cumbersome. --Richj1209 02:28, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Good work

message: This page needs to decide whether it wants to describe a fictional character (in which case it must say so at the start) or a real person (in which case a lot of the information here is either flat-out wrong or at least in heavy need of a source). Arbor 14:30, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In regards the two previous points Karl is not a ficitious character. Anyone who has been listening longer than 10 weeks knows this. Is Karl more self-aware about what is comedy? Yes. All the information here is from things Karl has said either live on XFM, BBC Radio 2, BBC6 Music or in the podcasts, interviews and DVD extras. MitchellStirling 11:52 7 February (UTC)
Well, I am extremely sceptical about the information under Biography, especially if that comes from anecdotes he has related during his radio shows. Arbor 12:38, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

text: User:JSpudeman removed the fiction tag (diff), and uselessly pronounced Karl to be a non-fictional. (By the way, he labelled the removal of the warning template as minor edit.) As far as I can see, the problems with the verifiability of this article remains, so I put the template back in. But it's up to debate, of course. To clarify: the existence of Karl is not in dispute, just as the existence of Jerry Seinfeld is not in dispute. Arbor 12:21, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think User:Jondevoy has solved the dilemma here over whether Karl is real or not. Reading User:Jondevoy's post, it is obvious really really dumb people do exist.  --- Mike
As others have remarked it has become more and more apparent lately, particularly with the video podcasts, that the character of "Karl Pilkington" is so exaggerated and contrived that it can be nothing but a comedy creation of Ricky Gervais and Stephen Merchant. The irony of course is that it was predicted a long time ago during the XFM shows by Chris Campling that KP was a creation of Gervais and Merchant, and whilst I believe at the time this assessment was incorrect (Karl was after all still a producer at XFM who essentially just happened to cross paths with RG and SM because of his job), it is obvious now that Karl's whole marketability rests on his consistently inane "opinions" and controversial viewpoints - and as such Chris Campling's comments have become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Is it worth mentioning this descent into becoming a character rather than a real person or would this be perceived as negative editorialisation? Durzel 17:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am relieved to see some common sense prevailing here. I am truly astonished that ANYONE could believe Karl was just a simpleton and not a made up character. It is blindingly obvious that he is simply playing a game of being thick to generate comedy material for Gervais and Pilkington (which by the way I happen to find extremely amusing). Firstly, Gervais is actually a very decent and moral human being and there is simply no way he would subject a genuinely stupid person to such brutal and offensive abuse. It would be like mocking a handicapped person and would be quite simply unacceptable. Gervais would not do this. Secondly, if Pilkington were genuine, would he not protest at his appalling treatment? He never ONCE raises even the slightest objection to the way he is treated in some 9 hours of podcasts. Thirdly, (and this point has been made above) his stupidity is far to "crafted" and "interestingly perverse" to be genuine. If it were authentic, it would be much less interesting and "mock-worthy". Finally, how could such an incredibly stupid person ever have become a recording engineer? The people who vehemently insist he is genuine are allowing themselves to be fooled, I guess, because they want to believe he is genuine; it's funnier that way. But even a cursory listening to the podcasts make it perfectly clear it is a comedic set-up. ---- Stuart. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.79.207.28 (talk) 18:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fact or fiction 

message: So, here's an idea, how about we make an article, perhaps called "The Ricky Gervais Show" (I believe it was unofficially titled that on XFM, as well as being the name on the new podcasts, from what I remember seeing on Sky Digital when I listened to it when it was aired) where we can have all the information about past and present features, including the list of quotes and examples in this article which are waaaaaaaaay too long, and leave this article with what it should be - an article with information about Karl Pilkington? Dav 20:04, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that could work, as long as it was made clear what information would go where. Things like Monkey News and Rockbusters belong in the show. Karl's back history belongs on his page and the factual parts of his biography in the same place. MitchellStirling 05:39, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

text: In principle, that's the same split as Jerry Seinfeld (about the man) and Seinfeld#Jerry Seinfeld (about the character). The only problem is to find any reliable information about the "real" Karl. In fact, I cannot see how the RealKarl article will ever be more than a paragraph, which means he wouldn't deserve a separate article. The gist of this is that I think the idea of separating the two issues is good, but I don't know if we need to separate into two articles, Two sections in the same article would be just as good. (FictionalJerry doesn't have his own page either, by the way. He has just a section.) Arbor 08:07, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's a good point, however, it's different to the point that the show has become quite a popular thing, and considering Ricky Gervais and Steve Merchant are also primary figures in the show, mean that it shouldn't have anything to do with an article about Karl Pilkington, the person. Whether it's real or not, it can be stated that information is received only through what's happening during the show, but there's no doubt that there is not a huge difference between Karl on-air and off-air, if that's what you're implying. An article about the show would involve Monkey News and Rockbusters, and Do We Need 'Em and That's Rickydiculous and so on, and would have information about the history of the show with XFM and its popularity at the time. This Karl Pilkingon article should solely have information like a biography, for which there's plenty of information already. Basically what I'm trying to say is that the Ricky Gervais Show has nothing to do with the article 'Karl Pilkington'. I'm all up for creating the two articles and ironing them out a bit if everyone else is. Dav 13:04, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I am less convinced than you that there is "more than enough" in the biography section. Going through those paragraphs with a marking pen reveals that pretty much everything consists of anecdotes about his childhood related in-show. If we play the game of being extremely sceptical about those stories (assuming for a moment that all these things are part of the fictional RadioKarl) then what remains is his date and place of birth, employment details about his time as a radio producer, and possibly a history exam (which he himself claims to not remember). But why not play this game here? Copy to this talk page whatever passages from the biography section you think adhere to WP:V. I then try to shoot it down. That would be a very efficient way of seeing what material we have got. Arbor 13:43, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I never said there was "more than enough," all I had said was that there were far too many examples of Monkey News, quotes and so on so much it pretty much looks like a WikiQuotes page. What I'm really trying to say is that the Ricky Gervais Show is such a popular show now with many of its own non-Karl related things that they would fit in its own article more than here, regardless of whether or not there's a lot of information about Karl Pilkington we can leave in the article. Dav 19:10, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

text: You are right. Independently of what the current page will end up as, there certainly should be an article called The Ricky Gervais Show, and much of the content of the current page can be moved there. Links from Ricky Gervais and Stephen Merchant, as well as from Podcast. (Picard voice:) Make it so. Arbor 19:48, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

text: ETA: Seeing that my link above isn't red, I conclude that there is an article about the show. It's two days old. Let the editing commence. Arbor 19:50, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Brilliant! It needs a LOT of work though. Obviously, a lot of people, especially those not in UK, believe that the show only existed as a podcast and have made it looks like that. I've attempted to make a start with the opening paragraph but we need some more information about the XFM show in there, too. Dav 20:45, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

text:  This does seem like a good idea to have the seperate section for the features of the original radio show. I will say this though. Karl is not a fictious character he is a real person, all these opinions are his own. The things said in the diary are his opinions and thoughts and they fit in with the kind of nonsense he has always said. Do you really think that Gervais could fake laughter to an extent where he is short of breath? Karl is a much more self-aware person now, he does try to be funny now. There is no real reason to think that stories about the web-footed freaks with big heads are made up. I don't think that his lack of memory regarding his exam results 15 years ago prove that he is making it up. Also bare in mind that the podcast isn't live, it's editted. While I will maintain that most of the parts of the biography section did happen, they don't belong in the biography section anymore, then Ricky's stories he told on Room 101 belong in his. An amusing child anecdotes section would be more helpful. MitchellStirling 08:57, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Karl and the show as two articles 

message: Here's a quick thought. Surely we can get rid of some of those links at the bottom? I'm not sure which are more valid than others but if somebody could give it a go, that would be a lot nicer. I mean, anybody must agree that there are far too many now, and it seems to me that people are creating this Karl Pilkington fansite and sticking their link into this article for more traffic. May not be the case, but that's the feeling I'm getting... Dav 11:43, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Those damned links 

message: If you haven't listened longer than the Podcasts, you should not be editing this Wiki. Karl does not laugh ever? Take out the wacky fanboyism and make a clear and concise entry about the man. I am goign to say the links are fine, but for the love of God, this is not a fan site. I love the man as much as the next person, but please keep it encyclopedic.
: You took the words right out of my mouth. Sort of. Dav 20:09, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stop 

message: This is not a fan site. This is an encyclopedia entry. I have tried to edit the piece to remove things unlikely to appear in an encyclopedia, and to return the proportion of the remaining sections to something that reflects their relative importance. The links section is still too long and should probably be cut by half. Many of the entries seem to be people promoting various personal websites about Pilkington and the podcasts. Uucp 20:33, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big edit of 30 March 2006 

message: As a listener to all the podcasts and most of the radio shows, I'd like to, first of all, thank everyone for the work so far. Secondly I'd like to add the following explanation for the perceived change in Karl's on-air persona.
There is also a noticeable change in Karl's on-air demeanour. On the Xfm show, he occasionally laughed at jokes made by Gervais, and occasionally stands up for what he has just said, or objects to being ridiculed. In the podcast however, Karl deadpans perfectly, and not once objects to the barrage of abuse suffered under the cackling Gervais. This argument cannot ultimately prove that Karl is a fictional character.
An explanation for the above is that the radio shows were live, while the podcasts are edited.Ste 00:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, that and even without editing, I don't think it's a change of personality, necessarily, than it is just Ricky putting up Karl to talk about certain things, as it seems to have a bit more forward planning than the XFM shows (which was almost non-existant most of the time). Dav 12:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion about change of persona 

message: I find it hard to believe that more is known about Karl Pilkington than Ricky Gervais, as demonstrated by the fact the Karl Pilkington's entry is slightly longer than Gervais's. I hadn't even heard of Pilkington unitl I followed a link. With is conversational yet confident tone and lack of supporting sources I am quite suspicious of this article. My 'expert' verdict: this is either written by Pilkington himself or someone very close to him (maybe his girlfriend of eleven years who he presented with, as a christmas present, his leaving present from xfm; seriously who knows that much about him?) 
This needs to be cut down to the facts which can be proved by linking to its sources; self-promotion especially in this way is pretty low and incredibly boring
----
You CLEARLY have not listened to any of the podcasts, nor the XFM radio shows and therefore are not qualified to give that opinion. For example, the leaving present, girlfriend thing was featured in the podcast and provided much humour. Karl Pilkington is a minor celebrity, has a substantial fanbase - just look at www.pilkipedia.co.uk and fully deserves an article. All of these, what you refer to as unsubstantiated facts, can be found in the podcasts and radio shows. Try actually listening to them. Many people do not find them 'low and incredibly boring'. Matfo 21:01, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main author 

message: The length of the whole entry, and depth, is completely unwarranted. A sense of proportion is surely desirable. Pilkington is not an ex-President of the United States nor Mahatma Gandhi.
:The length isn't too absurd. For comparison, it's shorter than both Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart, while the George W. Bush article is roughly triple the size. --TM 22:24, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This article should be cut to 20% of its current length. It is an embarrassment to Wikipedia. Uucp 17:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Length and depth

message: I have said this before and had the comments removed. I would like to stress that the self-consciously deadpan/droll/ironic delivery of this article smacks of fandom and (to my tastes) an unsuccessful attempt to raise a laugh. For example, Karl wants to take a paper round or dog walking but 'as stated by Karl, only if it doesn't rain.' Funny much? Surely this sort of stuff is only included because it has Karl's fans in ecstacies, but shouldn't readers be spared this rather rather clunking style of 'Let us all laugh at the man who maketh mock of himself by his own professions and by his own ambitions?' =/--82.44.21.151 20:38, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You'll note that you are not the first or last editor to make this valid criticism. The entire article is marked with the  template which indicates the tone is unencyclopedic. To help, you can start removing/modifying material which is undesired, rather than flogging a dead horse. Thanks. --TM 09:25, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tone

message: Now in its third season, the show features Pilkington in the role of a comedy foil, playing a dope opposite his more intelligent co-hosts.
I think this sentance is misleading. It suggests that Karl Pilkington's character is a portrayed character rather than it being a natural response. The sentance also suggests that Karl's role in the podcast series has changed for series 3 - which it hasn't. I know some believe that he is a character created by Ricky and Steve but there is no evidence for this. I think there is no reason why this sentance should be included therefore I'll remove it. Jamie 12:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening paragraph 

message: "Karl was also charged with littering crimes when he was 14 for throwing his BMX in the local river, he was released uncharged " - was he charged or not? 88.109.66.11 22:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charged? 

message: In the opening paragraph, the world of Karl Pilkington is described as being "based upon the subject matter discussed in the podcasts." Wouldn't it be more accurate to say it almost exclusively consists of transcripts of these shows? 86.142.211.237 18:50, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Based upon"?

message: . As I've no reason to believe this is true - Anon.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.101.177.224 (talk) 16:36, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, Somebody removed the blurb on his death, so I removed the template and fixed wording. Booticon (talk) 18:55, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "Death"

message: Karl's occupation is a philosopher? Surely not!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.168.28.14 (talk) 15:52, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philosopher? 

message: I added the fourth book he has written in the profile summary. I saw it was oddly missing but was included down below with his list of books.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.122.225.139 (talk) 14:44, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fourth book 

message: http://www.trafford.gov.uk/content/admissions/schooldetails.asp?DFESID=358-5401  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.238.218.155 (talk) 20:09, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ashton-on-Mersey School is in Sale, Cheshire - not Greater Manchester. 

message: Some of the sources seem to breach WP:RS, as well as WP:SELFPUB:
*The source cited for the Reuters article is an article on Ricky Gervais' website - this is self-published, refers to a third party (Karl Pilkington) and is published by someone whose career is linked to the subject - fails WP:V for not being a third-party source. Could this be replaced with a link to the actual Reuters item?
*This source is also from Ricky Gervais' website - fails WP:V for not being a third-party source.
*The source cited for the Culture show seems to be a blog, fails WP:BLOGS.
*The Qvoice link looks like an agency that represents Karl Pilkington for voice work - fails WP:V on the grounds of not being a third-party source.
Autarch (talk) 14:48, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reliable sources. 

message: An image used in this article, File:Mr Pilkington.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:56, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Mr Pilkington.JPG nominated for deletion

message: Karl Pilkington is also an inventor. He invented the Pilko-Pun Pants. Sold about 50 pieces live on TV.
109.228.148.107 (talk) 22:43, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: , unsourced and I wouldn't say that makes him an inventor--Jac16888 Talk 22:44, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 24 January 2012 

message: He is now an actor in Gervais' new comedy show so this should be included. He also is primarily a comedian and this should be included also.
90.215.77.147 (talk) 23:30, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This is already included at the bottom of the 'Television and DVD' section. As for being a comedian, you would need to find a source for that. Zarcadia (talk) 08:17, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 5 April 2012 

message: From the television and DVD section we have "Pilkington made his acting debut on 12 April 2012 in the Channel 4 sitcom Derek. He portrays caretaker and bus driver Dougie." Then, a few lines down in the filmography section, we have "In 2012, he appeared in his first proper acting role in Gervais' Channel 4 comedy-drama pilot, Derek. He played the role of Derek's (Gervais) best mate, Dougie." This kind of repetition looks unbelievably poor.2.28.47.24 (talk) 20:00, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplicate information 

message: Partner Suzanne Whiston for 10 - 15 years now? Brother Mark Pilkington  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.2.65.64 (talk) 20:59, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Karl's personal life 

message: Why does it say "Religion: Atheist"? Atheism is not a religion. - Jetro (talk) 22:32, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It would probably be more proper to state it as "Religion: None (atheist)", which is the way I've seen it done in several bio articles. But do we know that this is indeed Karl's stated belief system? — Loadmaster (talk) 01:08, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If his religious beliefs, or lack of them, are not relevant to his notability, it should be left blank.--ukexpat (talk) 01:19, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion 

message: In the table of his television and film roles his Cemetery Junction appearance is not mentioned  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:C440:20:1116:640C:C042:8CC7:41E7 (talk) 11:09, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cemetery Junction role 

message: Deadpan comedian. I guess he's so good at it that people believe it even in 'geek' places like Wikipedia. --fs 15:47, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  I like how his most famous and important job is not listed. 

message: What leads us to believe Karl lives in Ilford now?  Why on Earth would anyone move from Hampstead to Ilford? Steve is King (talk) 23:58, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ilford? 

message: Hey guys, it says Karl has been with Suzanne since 1994 yet I am sure pre-2013 he has mentioned he has been with her for 20 years at least? This could be a generalised statement from him but I just want some clarification!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.173.9 (talk) 04:08, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relationships 

message: 
Please change Suzanne under 'partner' to Suzanne Whiston as the use of Suzanne on its own is only known by those with pre-existing knowledge of the work of Karl Pilkington.

Edrayton3 (talk) 10:38, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 25 December 2013 

message: Karl's place of birth is given as...
"Sale, Greater Manchester". 
Given that his date of birth is 23 September 1972, it should be corrected without further delay to read "Sale, Cheshire".
This is because Greater Manchester did NOT exist prior to 1st April 1974.
If you're reading this and have access to editting, will you please oblige? Thank you.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.145.204.223 (talk) 11:29, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Took the initiative of making the edit. Please refer to, and if possible, improve it (?the wording?). SPNKs (talk) 09:34, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Place of birth is WRONG 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Karl Pilkington. 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/20131002183231/http://www.absoluteradio.co.uk/player/Christian-O-Connell-Breakfast-Show/8302/Karl-Pilkington--Ricky-Gervais-and-Stephen-Merchant-Conned-Me-Into-TV-Show.html to http://www.absoluteradio.co.uk/player/Christian-O-Connell-Breakfast-Show/8302/Karl-Pilkington--Ricky-Gervais-and-Stephen-Merchant-Conned-Me-Into-TV-Show.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:16, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Karl Pilkington. 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/20100930163002/http://www.waterstones.com/waterstonesweb/products/karl+pilkington/ricky+gervais/stephen+merchant/an+idiot+abroad/7652655/ to http://www.waterstones.com/waterstonesweb/products/karl+pilkington/ricky+gervais/stephen+merchant/an+idiot+abroad/7652655/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110517184751/http://www.waterstones.com/waterstonesweb/displayProductDetails.do?sku=6268363 to http://www.waterstones.com/waterstonesweb/displayProductDetails.do?sku=6268363
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100930163002/http://www.waterstones.com/waterstonesweb/products/karl+pilkington/ricky+gervais/stephen+merchant/an+idiot+abroad/7652655/ to http://www.waterstones.com/waterstonesweb/products/karl+pilkington/ricky+gervais/stephen+merchant/an+idiot+abroad/7652655/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:41, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:51, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: In the Early Years section we've got it saying that Karl created a number of features for the show eg. Rockbusters, Monkey News, and 15 Taiwan.
Unless I'm misremembering Karl suggested 15 Taiwan where he would buy 16 cheap products and Ricky and Steve (or the callers) would have to work out which one looked like it was from Taiwan. This was such a bad idea for a radio show that it never went any further.
Am I right in that? It could easily be replaced by one of the features that actually did run regularly like Do We Need 'Em? or Cheeky Freak of the Week. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ch1pp0 (talk • contribs) 
:Yep, you're right -- not even Pilkipedia has an article on 15 Taiwan. I'll remove it now. To be honest, I don't think we need to replace it with anything. There are already 3 other things in the list (an ideal number), followed up with . — Czello (Please tag me in replies) 09:38, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  15 Taiwan 

message: The article should also mention that one of the reasons Karl missed a lot of schooling was due to semi-regular holidays to Wales during term time. 51.9.13.215 (talk) 20:36, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early life