Talk:I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue

message: Is it just that it seems overly 'knowing' and familiar? Samantha is introduced in the article as 'the lovely Samantha' &c. Anyone care to give us a clue (drum, drum, cymbal) as to what needs improving? o~  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prolinol (talk • contribs) 17:25, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The "tone" tag was added as a drive-by act on 29 June 2009. Although the tag itself claims that there will be discussion here, there wasn't. If the tagger doesn't get round to explaining their problem then I don't think the tag has to stand. Indeed, I think there's chapter and verse somewhere on this which permits the removal of drive-bys. So, I am going to remove it, with the plea that if someone thinks a tag needs adding they shouldn't just do half the process - they should come here and do the other half, which is to tell us what the issue is that they feel needs attention. I don't mean to sound rude about this but I do think it is a basic courtesy to other editors. Best wishes to all, 94.170.104.219 (talk) 23:33, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  What exactly is wrong with the 'tone'? 

message: Coincidentally on June 24th when BBC4 aired the last (shame; I hadn't noticed that a new series had started) episode of the series featuring Rob Brydon's mimicry of Tom Jones singing Delilah, BBC7 repeated an episode from June 1997 where Barry Cryer failed to duplicate the feat, Humphrey commenting that the audience were doing better.
:"The fact that none of the participants can really sing (and, in the case of Jeremy Hardy and Stephen Fry, really can't sing) is played for laughs, as is the (alleged) inability of the show's pianist, Colin Sell."... Does Rob Brydon's performance merit the modification of this sentence to, perhaps, "The fact that very few of the participants can really sing..."? I'm sure we've had a few decent performances over the years ;-) Emyr42 15:50, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do like the juxtaposition of "can really" and "really can't". Maybe "...not many of the participants..." or just omit the "very"? Both are good compromises. Chris 42 16:39, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Tony Hawks has also done some very good singing on the show, to the amazed gasps of the audience, on a 2002 edition. And he's had a few hit singles hither and yon. Famous Mortimer 14:28, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Likewise Bill Bailey, in his appearances.  --Tailkinker 17:22, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rob Brydon & Delilah 

message: 81.96.73.99 changed this passage regarding Mornington Cresent
:Ostensibly it is an obscure game of extreme complexity, involving the naming of London Underground stations in convoluted patterns not readily discernible by the observer. In fact the rules are completely fictitious,
to
:Ostensibly it is an obscure game of extreme complexity, involving the naming of London Underground stations in convoluted patterns not readily discernible by the observer. In fact the rules are available from good libraries,
I reverted it, but thought that it was funny, so I put it here. Tim Ivorson 09:09, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A summary of the rules can be found in the Mornington Crescent article.  
The article has a spoiler warning and so might be a better way of doing it.Alecto 04:55, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Amusing inaccuracy

message: I don't know if this is suitable, and if so, where it would go, so I'm putting it here for now.
The first episode, originally broadcast on April 11, 1972, was rebroadcast by the BBC on April 3, 2006 by the BBC using a recording recovered through their Archive Treasure Hunt scheme. It was introduced as a panel game (rather than the antidote to panel games), featuring Tim Brooke-Taylor, Graeme Garden, Jo Kendall and Bill Oddie, with Humphrey Lyttelton in the chair and Dave Lee at the piano. It was produced by David Hatch.
*Round 1 was also the very first One Song to the Tune of Another. Graeme and Jo had to sing Three Blind Mice to the tune of Ol' Man River, while Tim and Bill had to sing a Song of Sixpence to the tune of These Foolish Things.
*Round 2 required the teams to read out an excerpt of a script in a given accent. Tim and Bill had to read an excerpt of Dr. Finlay's Casebook in a German accent while Graeme and Jo had to read an excerpt of Til Death Us Do Part in a Chinese accent.
*Round 3 required the teams to sing in an animal's voice. Jo and Graeme had to sing The Sound of Music in a sheep's voice while Bill and Tim had to sing Hello, Dolly! in a chicken's voice.
*Round 4 gave the teams two minutes in which to improvise a situation.
**Jo and Graeme's scene was an elocution class where a well-known sports commentator (possibly referring to Eddie Waring) was instructing a dumb blonde. They had to try to include sticking plaster, a liberty bodice and a rubber duck in the scene.
**Bill and Tim's scene was a TV chat show where the host was interviewing Long John Silver. They had to try to include a kangaroo, nude ladies, and a tin opener in the scene. However they overstepped their two minutes and had to be buzzed out by Humphrey Lyttleton (nowadays he uses a hooter).
*Round 5 was the first round of Word for Word. Tim linked Graeme's "idiot" to Jo's "hydrochloric acid". Jo linked Tim's "mother" to Bill's "egg". Bill linked Graeme's "Tony Blackburn" to Jo's "nausea". Graeme failed to link either Bill's "pomegranate" to Tim's "nun" or Tim's "Hamburg" to Bill's "green light".
*Round 6 was a calypso improvisation round where the subject of Jo and Graeme's calypso was a cucumber while that of Bill and Tim's calypso was an armadillo.
*Round 7 was a variant of Name That Tune, except that the opposing team la'd the tune on one note. Tim and Bill la'd Oh We Do Like To Be Beside The Seaside which Graeme guessed, while Jo and Graeme la'd God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen which almost exclusively uses equal length notes and is therefore virtually impossible to guess.
*Round 8 was almost a repeat of round 2 except that this time Jo and Graeme had to read Dr. Finlay's Casebook in an Australian accent while Tim and Bill had to read Till Death Us Do Part in a posh accent.
At the end of the show both teams were found to have scored 11 marks.
:...and it is being re-broadcast again (as I type!) – on BBC 7. It will be available on their "listen again" feature for the next week.  Listen and enjoy!! -- EdJogg 19:51, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For what it's worth, it's on the 30th anniversary CD too. Nick8325 12:24, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Ever Episode rebroadcast 

message: What i propose is to simply move this to say List of games in ISIHAC except leave brief descriptions of the most common and well known games on the start page. The current page is already getting too long. Simply south 17:07, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Games 

message: This is the text of the Sunday Times article I was given, but it doesn't have a date.
Dbromage 00:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WTBS recordings 

message: Has the episode where Barry sings "You're Getting to be a Habit with Me" to the tune of "William Tell" been released on any of the CDs? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.102.21.246 (talk) 20:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't seem to have been. Nick8325 19:47, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Audio releases 

message: I just read the paragraph on the tours and I didn't get it. What's done there? Are there four panalists performing a live show just like the recorded ones? Maybe just playing the games that are thought of to be the best. Or is there just a guest panalist how introduces recordings of the best shows? -- JanCK (talk) 22:43, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a live show with (when I went to see it) Tim Brooke-Taylor, Barry Cryer, Graeme Garden and Jeremy Hardy but, unlike the normal recordings, the show on the tour is scripted, with the panellists re-performing old games. --  JediLofty User ¦ Talk 08:52, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  tours 

message: Does anyone know if Hamish and Dougal will continue? Simply south (talk) 21:50, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The future of the whole show is currently in a tentative state. No doubt an announcement will be made some time in the future about what is being continued and what isn't. ~~ [Jam][talk] 22:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Hamish and Dougal

message: I've just added the total number of (non compilation) episodes, based on the numbers in the list above (simply as I counted them and wanted to save someone else the effort) - hopefully I'm right, but someone else might want to check my maths. (It's quite nice that there's one for every day of the year, shame they haven't all been saved!) The Stumo (talk) 22:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Total number of broadcast shows

message: What a fabulous artice! I'm so glad this is on WP. I hope I can contribute from time to time.
I just thought I'd make an observation about the use of tenses. Some parts of this article describe aspects of the show in the present tense, which is fine as it seems ISIHAC is going to continue, but there are other statments which refer to the late Humph which should be in some form of past tense. Obviously it's a bit tricky as we do not yet know which traditions of the show will continue follwing his loss, bt it's something we should keep an eye on.
And so as the transcluded template of time is reformatted by the sockpuppet of destiny, and the featured article of fate dissolves into the angry edit war of enternity, it's the end of my post. Cnbrb (talk) 12:49, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Past tense 

message: Since there is a separate article about recurring (and indeed even one-off) games in ISIHAC, do we really need to put detailed explanations in this main article? SimonTrew (talk) 22:53, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much about individual games 

message: There recently seems to be something of a difference of opinion   between User:179.109.201.24 (who it's fairly clear is also User:163.252.129.59, no sockpuppetry there just dynamic IP change) and other editors, about whether the lead should say that Humph was chairman of the show "from its inception". (Pretty much all the edits between these two. User:179.109.201.24 has characterised this as a "revert war" and it's time that the this went to discussion.
To put my hat into the ring, I think the lead should say that Humph was chairman from the start. (The word "inception" I am happy to change to "start", "beginning" or some such.) I don't think that implies he was the only chairman; the History section explains that Cryer shared the role for the first series; however the lead gives a general introduction to the article, and the fact that Cryer chaired a few is not relevant enough to go in the lead. (So little relevant to Cryer himself, it seems, that he doesn't mention it in the book I cited, which presumably is WP:PRIMARY but better to have it than not, I think.)
I think some version of the sentence should be reinstated, since it's important to say in the lead that Humph was the chairman. If that has to be qualified, then so be it, but let's not make the qualification longer than the statement itself (e.g. let's just put "Humph was chairman almost from the start" or "Humph was the perennial chairman from the start, with few exceptions". It's clear from various references that Humph was intended only for the role of chairman and not as a panellist, and he did in fact host the first episode. Si Trew (talk) 02:37, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Si.  I'd agree that it's crucial that Lyttleton has to be mentioned in the lead paragraph.  I've reworded a bit so that it's (briefly) noted in the lead that Lyttleton shared the chair in the first season, and have restored the rest of the sentence.  The IP's removal of mention of Lyttleton's role from the first paragraph of the lead made the second paragraph confusing (who is this Lyttleton fellow?).  Hopefully this will prevent further reversion.  Cheers, --PLUMBAGO 06:21, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Humph hosted it "from his inception" 

message: I'm sure I did cite which episode this came from, but it has since been removed. I can't find the particular edit which includes it. Can anyone help? 2.97.166.188 (talk) 07:37, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  John Humphrys 

message: The section in which it is sugested that other games such as Call My Bluff, My Music and Just A Minute are like ISIHAC entirely misses the point that, while granted the winning is not the main thing, they are shows in which the competition is real, and where it is possible to win (Just A Minute is recorded live, without edits or retakes, in real time; anyone is able to count up the points as they are earned). It isn’t possible to “win” ISIHAC, as it is never a competition (scoring is either not given, or given in a meaningless or partisan fashion), it just takes the format of a panel game. Jock123 (talk) 22:08, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison to other shows? 

message: Is it just me or does the opening theme start with a sample from the German national anthem?
Links for comparison:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDlo0Ys1VNw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SkQKpZMZ5M
88.104.249.132 (talk) 12:34, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  German National Anthem 

message: Under Broadcast list the first two episodes of the 73rd series are listed as being broadcast on 11 and 18 November 2020, respectively, but the BBC's episode pages on those episodes
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000pw82 and
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000q3gr show them as being first broadcast on 30 November and 7 December 2020 respectively. Series 74 eps 1-4 were (according to the BBC's website) were broadcast on successive Mondays over the following four weeks, ending on 4 January 2021, but the article has them broadcast on 25 November - 29 December. Where did the information in the article come from? Wocky (talk) 15:26, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Series 73/74 broadcast dates