Talk:Top Gear (2002 TV series)/Archive 3

message: some of the sections especially when talking about dates appears to contradict other parts of the article.--Lucy-marie 14:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you cite some examples? --Zevensoft 23:13, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't follow either.  I have removed the :Template:Contradict, but feel free to readd it once you cite some examples.  Until then I don't really see the point in having it on the article. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 09:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  contradictions 

message: I wonder if the Board ws changed within Time, did some cars dissappear secretly? Ive seen an clip from 2002 Series1 Episode3 featuring the Westfield XTR2 doing the Powerlap in 1:22:60. Why was it deletet, and are other cars missing as well? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.161.235.244 (talk • contribs) 19:41, 1 September 2006
:Yes, some of the cars were removed with (to my knowledge) no explanation... I believe it happened between series 1 and 2 though I can't remember for sure. - Blah3 10:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I seem to recall them saying at some point that a car must be able to go over a speed hump to be allowed on the power lap board. Perhaps that's why the XTR2 was removed. 210.84.6.179 09:42, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I vote that those are added to the power lap section with a note mentioning when they disasspeared from the board.  I have Season one/two and can easily freeze frame the cars and times.  As the article has been flagged as too long perhaps we should move the power laps to a seperate article and include other information such as the fastest politial party/religion/etc and any other vehicle timed around the track.Sturmovik 03:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Power Lap 

message: I uploaded some free use images to the commons.  They are available at Commons:Category:Top Gear. They aren't the greatest images, but at least they are useful in that they aren't fair use like the images we have now. :Image:Top gear toybota 2.jpg is probably the best of the pack. I wasn't really sure where to place the image, so maybe someone else will have a suggestion. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 04:31, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Free images on the commons 

message: What about motorbike rider Steve Berry? Chubby-faced Tony Mason? And didn't Andy Wilman present for a bit? I'm a bit useless so don't know how to add them to the box at the bottom, so if somebody else wants to do that...  Beanhead McGinty 22:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing presenters 

message: According to a Norwegain newspaper article (http://www.vg.no/pub/vgart.hbs?artid=131292) the car won the car vs. bob-sled race in Lillehammer, but was given status as the loser in the show.--84.48.210.51 17:53, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do they change the winners of the races? 

message: Why is Top Gear split into two sections; one referring to the original format of the show and another describing 2002 onwards?  Surely it should all be on one page?
:The current format of the programme really is noticeably different from the original (which evolved more into Fifth Gear on Channel 5). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.19.68 (talk • contribs) 15:42, 21 September 2006
because there is little to no difference between old and new top gear. the only common factor is cars but new top gear is studio based, wheras old top gear just showed a series of film segments from the presenters. Pratj 19:14, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original / modern format of the show 

message: The wikipedia page seems to be missing any mention of the "most popular motoring song survey" conducted a few seasons ago. That whole season had a lot of '"Meatloaf"' (the artist/band) bashing with the Queen song finally winning the survey.
Distributed 08:45, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally I don't consider it a notable part of the show.  Perhaps others disagree though... - Blah3 16:23, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

text: It might be worth adding a section on viewer polls, which could include this and the famous car restoration section.--Schaedenfreud82 16:42, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most popular motoring song survey 

message: For the purposes of the Top Gear Wikipedia entries, should the Stig be considered a presenter of the show?  While I know he is not a presenter in the usual sense, I feel an argument could be made that it could be a description of his role on the show.  Furthermore, (and more importantly, IMO) he is credited as a presenter in every single episode of the show since its launch in the current format.
It is a minor detail, however it is probably worth some discussion as it has come up in past edits, and will again, I'm sure. - Blah3 04:23, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes he's credited as a presenter on the show's end titles, however no definition of "presenter" could extend to what he does.  As well as being described as a presenter he's also given crazy introductions on every episode such as "Some say the outline of his left nipple is exactly the same shape as the Nürburgring". In my opinion his description as a presenter is as tongue in cheek as those. Important member of the crew? Yes. Presenter? No. An encyclopedia should contain facts, not be constrained by external conventions etc. Mark83 08:48, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

text: There were two reasons why I reverted Shas'o sodit's edit.  Firstly (bearing in mind recent events here and his own particular edit history) it looked like he was trying to start an edit war.  There really was no particular need to change the sentence, unless you wanted to create an issue out of it - and implementing the change three times suggests that you do want to make an issue out of it.  But the main reason I reverted the change was because the sentence just flowed better as it was.  As The Stig is the only one who has any kind of explanation to is role in the whow, the 'rhythm' of the sentence just seemed better the way it was.  (Oh and Shas'o sodit, do try to be WP:CIVIL please.) DrFrench 18:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

text: That sounds very much like "If you won't let me have TGD, you can't have The Stig" - and that's bordering on WP:DISRUPT.  DrFrench 14:09, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Stig as a TG presenter 

message: DECEMBER 2006
HOW DARE YOU CALL ME A vandal? I put the pov tag up because the fanboyismin is overkill and full off pointless trivia. Do we need 1000 about caravan destruction? or comments on every trivial comment the presenters make? 
The Toyota page has a tag and is tidier and has better layout than this  page.
Then per the tags itself, put down your reasons as to why the article is NPOV and needs a cleanup. Otherwise, I will consider it to be vandalism given you have not provided a reason.--293.xx.xxx.xx 06:32, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: vandalism and edits by 293.xx.xxx.xx

message: I read in the Sunday Times http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22750-2436052,00.html that the American TV presenter Jay Leno thinks that "Top Gear is the best motoring programme in the world". Worthy of a mention?
---- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.140.6.214 (talk) 16:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, Leno is a comedian, not a television critic.  I supposed it could loosely be argued otherwise, but that information is just too trivial to include. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 11:22, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Jay Leno

message: 48K.size.....starting to gather cruft....time to trim the fat a/or transfer stuff elsewhere.--293.xx.xxx.xx 05:51, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is too long...again 

message: Here's the original production section.  I don't disagree in Slf67's removal of the section because in its current form it is rather redundant and is entirely unsourced.  However, most FA relating to tv shows do mention production, so if this section could be reasonably expanded and sourced, it should probably be brought back back in.
:The programme is filmed at the Dunsfold Park Aerodrome in Surrey. The studio is inside a hangar. The audience of up to 400 enthusiasts, who have applied to the BBC for free tickets, stand next to the presenters during the filming, allowing many opportunities for interaction. For the eighth series, the studio was remodelled, with more car-based props on display. The grounds of the airfield is used as the infamous Top Gear Test Track. Details of the layout can be found here.
--PS2pcGAMER (talk) 09:39, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Production section 

message: (Note: I'm posting this here instead of the sub-articles as it seems a more centralised place for discussion.) The articles for celeb laps, the cool wall and the power laps are almost blatant copyvios of the BBC website here, here and here and should be removed and/or trimmed appropriately (and possibly have the histories deleted as well). Comments? Zunaid©® 12:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (cross-posted on Wikipedia:Help desk) It looks like you're referring specifically to the tables of lap times copied from the BBC Top Gear pages (correct me if I'm wrong). IANAL, but those lap times are facts, which cannot be copyrighted. --Plek 23:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

text: See Wikipedia:Copyrights. Xiner (talk, email) 01:45, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyvios? 

message: I feel this would be better as a standalone article with only a brief summary of the type of races that took place, not an entire list.  What do you think? ncma 17:59, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Better yet, simply trim them down and leave the excessive detail out of the 'pedia entirely. The article as it stands currently is far too full of in-universe cruft which has no real-world significance. The article's focus should be on the program's real-world impact rather than focusing on in-universe detail. Wikipedia is not written "for fans, by fans" but rather with the general reader in mind. Zunaid©® 11:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it! Myself and others have been trimming this fancruft-ridden article back for a few weeks - Races is the last section to go.  --Steve  (Slf67)  talk  12:28, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed most examples, however left one of each type of race to increase understanding ncma 19:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section:'Races' 

message: I added an episode section as there is a page with all episode details on it. I'm not sure if I have placed it in the right section or not. Samaster1991 19:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a link to the episode list in "See also", having a section just to have a link seems a bit overkill --Steve  (Slf67)  talk  22:20, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Episodes

message: There have been a number of edits to add the 2007 results to the list of Top Gear Survey results.  The results announced in Feb 2007 were those for the 2006 survey, i.e. the survey that took place in 2006.  The 2007 survey will presumably take place later in the year with the results announced in early 2008. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DrFrench (talk • contribs) 11:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Top Car Survey

message: I think it is time to come to a more definitive consensus on weather Top Gear Dog should be included in the starring list in the infobox and the Top Gear template.  User:Davesmith33 argues in his latest edit summary that ""Top Gear Dog" is stated on the TG website as being a "star" of the show".  I haven't verified this myself, but for the sake of argument, Top Gear Dog is not listed in the starring section of the ending credits.  I don't really find this argument particularly strong one way or the other.  I am not really sure how to quantify Top Gear Dog's notability in order to decide if she should be included in the starring lists.  Google News brings up zero hits .  Google search fairs slightly better , but most either mention the name in passing, have her name in the current episode description or aren't reliable sources.  Any opinions?  Should TG Dog be listed in the infobox and the template? --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 22:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To my mind, not if she isn't listed in the credits. The Stig only made it into the infobox because he was listed as a presenter in the credits, and he has a far more important role in the show. --Scott Wilson 18:29, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

text: The dog doesn't "present", it's a fancrufty in-joke --Steve  (Slf67)  talk  22:12, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree with Scott Wilson and Steve.  TGD is just an in-joke and thus merely deserves a passing mention, not crediting as a presenter.
DrFrench 22:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

text: True, but neither does the Top Gear Dog particularly star - she sort of floats about the set and occasionally gets taken out on location. If we were to include the Top Gear Dog, you could argue that we should also list all the other recurring people (the rocket group, for instance); they probably have as much influence on the show. --Scott Wilson 18:09, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I disagree, for the reasons stated above by others. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 02:38, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

text: No one has stated any reason on why the Stig should be removed.  Seems like WP:POINT to me. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 08:11, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Starring Top Gear Dog, yay or nay? 

message: The article will reach a quick fail right off the bat if the statements that are followed by citation needed tags don't have citations added to them. For now, you can remove the statements from the article to the talk page and readd them once you have sources. --Nehrams2020 22:55, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA comment

message: I have added a section on the How Hard Can It Be challenges, if you wish to edit these, do so at your will but mleave me a message first. 1B6 12:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have occasionally heard the presenters use the words "how hard can it be" but I think it is misleading to say that this is the name of the segment. And why do we have to leave you a message before editing this - by adding content you agree that it can be freely edited. It says at the bottom of every edit page, "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it." Halsteadk 20:11, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Hurrah! :-) Halsteadk 20:39, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "How hard can it be?" 

message: As most of the information in this article is trivial, I suggest it be considered for removal from the Top Gear infobox, there is less information there than, for example, in the Top Gear Dog article which was deleted. Davesmith33 12:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This looks suspiciously like another attempt at WP:DISRUPT to me.  DrFrench 13:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes you are very good at that sort of thing, French. Davesmith33 21:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jon Bentley 

message: After reviewing the article, and comparing it to the good article criteria found at WP:WIAGA, I have unfortunately had to fail it for GA status.  The reasons why are:
*Referencing: The article has many sections that are currently unreferenced.  Most egregious is the insufficient referencing of the History section.  How Hard Can it Be is also unreferenced.  Top Gear Survey is also unreferenced.  The Cool Wall is unreferenced.  As well, there are some references in plain html format without ref tags.  These need to be fixed for consistency.  Also, there are fact tags in a few places, a sure sign of a quick-fail.
*Unneccesary trivia.  Listing every instance of a segment, such as How Hard Can it Be, is probably an egregious amount of trivia.  A review of the segment format, with some cursory examples would be better.
*Style.  The title seems a bit confusing to me.  Perhaps naming the two articles: Top Gear (1977-2001) and Top Gear (2002- ) may be better.  This is even how they are refered to in the navbox at the bottom.
This article is a good start, but still needs the work I have noted above before it is GA ready.  Please feel free to renominate it when the above changes are made.  If you have any questions, please drip a note at my talk page.  Good luck, and happy editing!--Jayron32|talk|contribs 20:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Failed: Extensive notes

message: The Stig can't be classed as a presenter.  If Top Gear Dog, who let's not forget was actually introduced as, quote - "a new presenter", can't be included in the list, then The Stig sure as hell can't.  I propose an "Also Starring:" section. Davesmith33 22:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Quit disrupting to make your point.  We've done this argument to death.  We've gone through this argument a full two times in the last week, do we really need to do it again?  --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 22:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No I certainly don't want to revisit old ground The stig stays he is accredited as a presenter and appears in every show "presenting" the performance of the cars doing laps around the track.--Lucy-marie 13:18, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Stig doesn't present

message: I found a page about Top Gear affecting car sales. Not sure if it can be used as a citation though.
http://www.austin-rover.co.uk/index.htm?cityroverstoryf.htm
The other story I can think of is the sales slump of the Ford Ka when Clarkson referred to it as "like a particularly ugly frog".
While we are talking about references, there are a number of pages under the TG umbrella that are totally unreferenced.  Can someone tidy these up please, if not I will propse an AfD nomination. Davesmith33 18:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why dont you tidy them up then?  Constructive editing is always welcomed. DrFrench 18:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation

message: There is no longer a consensus that TGD is not a presenter as somebody called Ferrari2503 (rightfully) added her back in this morning.  Therefore, as stated on WP:CON, the "Silence equals consent" rule, which "is the ultimate measure of consensus" no longer applies as I far as I can see. Davesmith33 18:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, that editor has made less than 20 edits to the entire project, and adding the dog was their first and only edit to TG.  I suspect that person had not participated or even viewed the prior, extensive discussions on the dog and saw that consensus was indeed reached.  So, in summary, "drive by" editors do not change consensus. --Steve  (Stephen)  talk  23:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I've changed "Presenters" to "Starring".  Obviously Stiggy belongs in the infobox.  Whether he is a presenter or not is debatable, but the show definitely stars the Stig.  Dave, either way, TG Dog is not a presenter and does not starring in the show.  --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 19:17, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dave, a fact is not necessarlly notable enough to warrant inclusion in an enyclopaedia. That I like the occasional pint of Guinness is a fact - however it is not notable enough to justify inclusion in Wikipedia.  In any event, TGD being a presenter is not a fact... it's just a joke. So please stop asking the other parent.  If you still disagree and want to push your POV, then you might wish to consider taking it to some form of dispute resolution.  However this is not an action to be taken lightly, as going down the WP:RFC route will also involve discussion of your disruptive editing across a range of Top Gear related articles lately. DrFrench 19:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

text: WP:DISRUPT.  They would all end with speedy keep as that is not a deletion criterion. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 10:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I think you'll find it is as vital information is deliberately being kept from the public just to please a certain minority's agenda.  Instead of removing perfectly legitimate related links, why not start adding some references to the other articles on that infobox, again before they are nominated for deletion because they are not sourced whatsoever?  Davesmith33 11:53, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There really is no pleasing you is there?  You put an AFD on the Jon Bentley article because you claimed it was unreferenced, yet you add unreferenced material to the same article  claiming that 'references are nothing'.  Which is it Dave? You can't have it both ways.  Oh and do remember that admins aren't stupid, they can tell the difference between a notable fact and inconsequential trivia.  TGD is the latter.  I really think it's time for you to 'put up or shut up'.  Please, take all your grievances to WP:RFC - but be prepared to accept the consequences, as they will also examine your behaviour and disruptive editing. DrFrench 00:12, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I changed the wording to say "At the beginning of Series 8, Hammond introduced a female Labradoodle, the Top Gear Dog. However, she was not featured regularly in series 9."  This was an attempt to make it a fancruft-free neutral statement, as there was confusion as to how many times she was featured in series 9. Please explain what part of this constitutes vandalism? DrFrench 17:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And one of the ways that consensus work is by trying a different wording - a compromise - that everyone can live with.  So I ask you again, please indicate which part of "At the beginning of Series 8, Hammond introduced a female Labradoodle, the Top Gear Dog. However, she was not featured regularly in series 9."  is vandalism, otherwise I politely request that you withdraw the comment.  DrFrench 17:43, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Just a note that this arbitration case was rejected and deleted.  --Steve  (Stephen)  talk  23:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I see that Davesmith33 has added TGD back to the infobox again, claiming there is no consensus for it to be excluded.  I think there is plenty of consensus to exclude TGD.  As previously stated on numerous occasions, TGD is neither as presenter or a star... just a short-lived in-joke. DrFrench 15:59, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Can we please have a reliable source that Top Dog is a Top Gear presenter, SqueakBox 16:28, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, of note Dave is also edit warring here about a "co-starring" param. Matthew 16:31, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Please see the section Starring Top Gear Dog, yay or nay?  There is no consensus for TGD to be included as a presenter, star or co-star.  Raising the subject again merely appears to be 'asking the other parent' and bordering on disruptive editing.  I'm not sure why you want to start another round of unpleasantness over this.  Please don't.  Nobody enjoys it.  Do take on board the comments made by some members of the ArbCom that your behaviour was a "cause for concern".  If you can work out why they said that and change your actions accordingy, you will soon become a respected and valued editor.  If you do not, you will win no friends and you will find people scrutinising your actions more closely, suffer frequent blocks and eventually face the possibility of an indefinite ban - and nobody wants that to happen. (Some comments above have been copied from Davesmith33's talk page which he removed.)  DrFrench 16:34, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

text: It is just a joke to put TGD on the same level as The Stig, and this would give a completely false impression of the relative importance of the two to anyone reading this article who isn't familiar with TG. Can I put this in the context that this article is meant to be encyclopedic, and is primarily written for the education of people who do not know about the subject, not for the entertainment of a few fans of the show. The Stig has appeared in every episode, TGD appeared briefly in each(?) episode of the 8th series, and briefly in 2/3 episodes of the 9th (and would probably have gone unnoticed if there had been no appearance at all). I'm not sure TGD had an essential role in any of its appearances, but the Stig is clearly central to the significant parts of the show he is involved in. Halsteadk 16:40, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: With a good secondary source I would fully support Top Dog's inclusion but not otherwise, SqueakBox 17:00, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm sure I'm not the only person who is getting rather bored going over and over and over the same ground repeatedly.  I'll repeat what I wrote on 2007-04-05... "Dave, a fact is not necessarlly notable enough to warrant inclusion in an enyclopaedia. That I like the occasional pint of Guinness is a fact - however it is not notable enough to justify inclusion in Wikipedia.  In any event, TGD being a presenter is not a fact... it's just a joke. So please stop asking the other parent."  Surely you can tell the difference betweeen an encyclopaedic fact and a joke?  DrFrench 21:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:NOTE would tend to disagree with you. DrFrench 21:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

text: TGD has never been listed in the ending credits to my knowledge.  The only people who have ever changed Top Gear Dog to a presenter/star are Davesmith and the occasional IP/newbie edit.  To my knowledge, only two people (at most) have ever voiced support for including TGD as a presenter here on the talk page.  The overwhelming consensus is to exclude her. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 22:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Top Gear Dog Consensus

message: Yes, I did watch the show. But you might want to think of an alternative way of phrasing whatever it is you're trying to say. At the moment it really does not make any sense whatsoever. Also consider whether this information needs to be added to the article at all. The information that was previously there was probably adequate for an encyclopaedic reference.  If you're adding an opinion it will doubtless get removed in time anyway. DrFrench 19:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Have re-worded the user's contribution a bit. Fairly sure this is how it was portrayed in the show, so it's not POV. Halsteadk 21:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Top_Gear_%28current_format%29&diff=122290777&oldid=122283938 This] edit by [[User:Shas'o sodit]] 

message: This is a note for Davesmith33.  I'm postng this message here so that it will be seen by others.  There seems little point in posting it to your talk page as you'll just blank it (again).
Please do not use misleading edit summaries.  Trying to enter contentious information (as you did here) and pass it of as a 'typo' is simply dishonest.  DrFrench 21:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading edit summaries 

message: Why has all mention of Sabine Schmitz been removed from the main article? Davesmith33 16:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably because she isn't deemed important enough to the development of the programme as a whole to warrant a mention.  Remember this is an encyclopaedia not a fansite.  DrFrench 16:45, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

text: There has to be some limit - you wouldn't record the shirts that the presenters all wear in each episode, for instance.  In the programme, she is just treated as a recurring guest, so I would say that she doesn't really deserve much of a mention. Stephenb (Talk) 17:01, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Dave you have to balance that with WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE which says "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of items of information. That something is 100% true does not automatically mean it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia."  I've never said that I was "in charge of such matters", but to be honest I would have thought it not that difficult to discriminate between relevant encyclopaedic information and mere trivia.  Who do you think has had more influence on the direction and development of the show? The person who was the producer and editor for more than a decade and is credited with hiring Jeremy Clarkson?  Or someone who has appeared in a couple of features across two episodes.  For what it's worth, I certainly don't have any objection in principle to Sabine being given a brief mention somewhere.  A suitably-worded sentence in order to provide a wikilink to her own article doesn't seem unreasonable.  However, you might want to consider if it's more suitable for inclusion in the relevant episode guide rather than the main article.  I do not think she is important enough to be included in the Top Gear infobox. DrFrench 18:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was going to add that challenging other editors in that manner (e.g. implying that you're going to add something contentious to an article merely to provoke an edit war) is another clear example of WP:DISRUPT.  However, it seems Davesmith33 has been blocked for a week, following a dispute with some Admins over the content of his talk page.  DrFrench 20:45, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Somewhat confusingly there were two separate articles; Sabine Schmitz created on 31 July 2005 and Sabine Schmidt created on 28 March 2007.  The latter was changed to a redirect to the former on 1 April 2007 by Davesmith33.  If you know which is the correct spelling (and preferably have a properly sourced reference to support it, thus avoiding another edit war) then please correct the articles accordingly.  DrFrench 20:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we have it right.  "Sabine Schmidt" doesn't really bring up anything useful on google.de.  However, "Sabine Schmitz" brings up this and this.  de-wp also spells it the same way we do.  --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 21:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sabine Schmitz 

message: This entire section is unreferenced and is original research.  Unless we can find a reliable, 3rd party source where all these "gags' are mentioned it should be removed. --Steve  (Stephen)  talk  23:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I support this - there are also some misleading statements, eg Hammond - apparently he denies his teeth were "capped", I have never heard this word used; the article says he got his nickname due to his name, stature and eating cardboard - wrong, he had his name long before he showed his cardboard-eating habits; only Clarkson calls him that - actually I'm sure May has too, and as they are the only others who speak (well the Stig can't, so unless TGD becomes a presenter...) doesn't that mean everyone calls him it then?? It all reads like fan-talk to me, only some of it has clearly not been written by long-standing fans. (EDIT:) And more, James May is emphasised not to have any speeding tickets - I don't remember that specifically but Clarkson has regularly mentioned on the show and elsewhere that he has none, eg when Stephen Ladyman was a guest, so the point is irrelevant to James's nickname. Can't see anything of value here. Halsteadk 23:19, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No-one seemed to have any objections, nor were any references added, so I have removed this section --Steve  (Stephen)  talk  01:46, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Running gags 

message: I don't think this is an encyclopaedic phrase. Also, it is missing a full stop.
Smonnie 15:22, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: as he is not the biggest person in the world

message: Quote from the article:
 "Clarkson was deemed the winner as he got one photograph of his celebrity
 into the papers, although, as his co-presenters pointed out, the image appeared as part of Clarkson's own 
newspaper column in The Sun." 
I was under the influence that Clarkson wrote for The Sunday Times, and has ridiculed The Sun many times. I'm either confused or wrong.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by To Kick Ass and Chew Gum (talk • contribs).
:Clarkson has written for both.  See this.  Clarkson is mentioned in the browser's title bar. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 19:58, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture in The Sun

message: Although the BBC site credits the British Amateur Rocket Society for the Top Gear "space shuttle" launch, I can't find any reference to an organization with that exact name. Although I can't find a BARS, I can find a number of similarly-named organizations: see http://www.ukra.org.uk/links/view/all/1
Several web sources suggest that a company called RocketMen Ltd was responsible for the engineering on the project, together with the Bristol UWE engineering department (who are clearly identified in the show). See  
 Further Googling brings up two names repeatedly: Damian Hall and Colin Rowe, who seem to be associated both with UKRA and the mysterious RocketMen Ltd.
for details. -- Karada 08:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  British Amateur Rocket Society 

message: I'm thinking that maybe there should be a section for hillarious moments or great quotes from Top Gear?
I can only remember the one where Hammond was having such a great time he shouted "I am a driving God!" which May and Clarkson ridiculed greatly.
I'm sure there are much more. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.21.17.86 (talk) 23:43UTC, 12 June 2007
:: There's already a page on Wikiquote for Top Gear (see here).  That would seems a better place for large numbers of 'great quotes'.  DrFrench 11:40, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comedy Moments (Or whatever name maybe) 

message: I have a suspicion that this was a race to the North Magnetic Pole, not to the North Pole (see e.g. http://www.polar-challenge.com/). That's a totally different location. The on-screen SatNav coordinates when they were supposedly at the North Pole were nowhere near the 90 deg. North it should have been, and the stated distance of 400 miles from Resolute just doesn't stack up either. "North Pole" by itself does not by any stretch of the imagination mean North Magnetic Pole, so something is wrong with this story somewhere.
In fact, since writing the above I've just found that the coordinates displayed on their SatNav at the "Pole", which I noted down, are the coords that the Polar Race people use for the North Magnetic Pole (see http://polarrace.com/about/faq/). So, unless anyone has any other thoughts, that seems pretty conclusive.
*I agree with you.  Clarkson also states that Resolute was the Northernmost settlement when it clearly isn't (two places in Norway and Alert are much closer to the real pole).  This was clearly done as part of the Polar challenge events where support infrastructure was in place to make sure the presenters and the film crew could get up and back w/o getting stranded or turning into blocks of ice.Sturmovik 02:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious 

message: Perhaps it's just myself, but often I have seen that the hosts of Top Gear seemingly go out of their way to bash Americans and perpetuate American stereotypes. Have there been any complaints against the show for this?
--Sturmwehr 20:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not aware of any complaints - however I would say that the Anti-Americanism does seem to come pretty much solely from Jeremy - who echoes these views in his books.  Reference the "Amphibious Cars" episode where he stated that his outbound motor that weighed 600 pounds was the "equivilant to having a whole American sat on the back".  I will try to find a source with info on complaints (as Top Gear *is* renowned for attracting them!) but I don't know if it's something that would be readily available.  Davetibbs 10:44, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't say the tailgate jibe was "Anti-American" – it was merely an illustration of how much 600lb is... And it's hardly offensive to say that some Americans are overweight – that's hardly headline news! And there wasn't even a hint of "a whole American (which I hate because they're shit)" or whatever, so any complaints would be a vast over-reaction DBD 22:06, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would. You are also assuming that the average American is overweight - a biased and ignorant statement. How would you feel if I accused the entire British populance of having bad teeth and still not knowing what tooth paste is? It's not only ignorant, it's unrealistic. And, yes, it is an anti-British statement. --Sturmwehr 06:15, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd chuckle and put it down as a joke... Like when Family Guy have done it. DBD 11:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course it was a joke, the thing we are trying to establish here is if it's anti-American. In which case, I certainly think it is. Saying something in the format of a joke doesn't make the words have less meaning. If someone were to tell a joke about Jews in a negative light in WW2, it doesn't make the words any less anti-semitic. Also, Top Gear is not a comedy show like Family Guy either. So your analogy is completely flawed. --Sturmwehr 14:08, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, bar a few notable examples like the Ford GT.  I guess it's based on the assumptions that most American cars have appalling handling and fuel consumption, comparatively terrible build quality and that US Automotive companies just seem to build bigger engines when they want more power rather than improving the design.  The Japanese get the same power as an American 5 litre V8 out of a 2 litre flat four. Davetibbs 14:37, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti-Americanism 

message: Although the whole caravan fire stunt was obviously staged (they wouldn't have been allowed to run back inside to rescue a dressing gown if it wasn't a controlled event...), it raises a question of just how much of the trip was staged. At one point Hammond threw a cushion that was on fire out of the window, setting the next-door caravan alight - it seems fair to assume that this was all part of the plan. They had previously driven the caravan into the awning, buckling it so perhaps this was part of the plan too? So just how much of the entire trip was staged? I wonder just how real the Arctic trip was - we never saw them together after they left, and according to the programme had just one camera crew out there, so I'm utterly sure they did not race each other simultaneously - it would have been far more difficult, and wouldn't have made any difference to the programme.  It's still great telly and doesn't spoil my enjoyment, but Clarkson has stated that these road trips are NOT staged, and only what happens in the studio is tightly scripted... Halsteadk 11:55, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To clarify, I don't doubt they reached the pole (well one of them!), but I suspect it wasn't actually done as a simultaneous race - I think the logistics would have been much more difficult and it didn't seem to make any difference to the show. However, as I say, staged or not, none of this takes away from one of the best programmes (in terms of entertainment and production quality) on the telly for me. Halsteadk 19:41, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I had always believed the rocket launch was authentic but after some careful analysis of a clip on Youtube I'd have to admit it probably wasn't the case.  The "12 days" isn't necessarily accurate as there could have been months between filming dates, but even so I agree it would have taken a lot to pull it off.  That said I can't spot the scale model and trick photography so easily! Davetibbs 17:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Staging