Talk:Have I Got News for You

message: Is it worth mentioning the writers of the show? I've just read an interview with them here: http://www.sitcom.co.uk/writers/haveigotnewsforyou.shtml  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.150.233 (talk) 19:15, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Writers?

message: not been able to ref the series or episode but hte one with [Jack Dee] where they keep on making names for pot noodles  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.100.103.136 (talk) 16:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: One more high point

message: Started Have I Got News For You episodes list. Its my first atempt at doing tables. Saul Taylor 02:27, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Episodes list 

message: Could Piers Morgan's appearance be considered a high point? I'm tempted to put it in. I know its considered the worst appearance by any guest ever but its highly watchable - I think its the same phenomenon as people slowing down to watch a car crash. Mark 21:00, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Morgan 

message: What article of HIGNFY could be complete without mention of Boris Johnson appearances. For those who haven't seen these delights (both as guest, and as guest presenter), then the MP for Henley's rambling tangential style is TV gold.
In particular: during his guest presenter appearance, when the autocue would, at every available opportunity, try to get Boris to swear, and his efforts to avoid this.
: Paul did that too. Thanks to whoever corrected the DVD synopsis of "The Full Boris". I was sure that it was 90 minutes, but I've watched again this week, just to make sure, and it is indeed 60. But then again, seeing as its Boris we're talking about, it probably feels like 90 minutes each time you watch it. Robert Mc Cann
According to the show's main page Boris has been banned from appearing on the show ever again (with no evidence). On the list of episodes page it shows that Boris is to host the show on the 15th December. Should the 'fact' be deleted? Kelly elf 11:11, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not right, is it? Well, I don't know what the episode list's source is for Boris hosting the last show this series, but if he is we should certainly delete that bit from the main article. Though on a personal note, I'll be highly diasppointed if Kirsty Young isn't presenting any this series. She's clearly the best one.--PaulTaylor 16:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Dara o'Briain is good, but I don't think you really want a comedian hosting it, a non-comedian who's funny is better. Besides, Dara's doing Mock the Week now - he can't have two topical BBC comedy panel shows.--PaulTaylor 15:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Deyton was a comedian. Young is a news presenter - where's she going to get the time to film HIGNFY? I think Dara would ditch Mock the week in a flash if the chance for HIGNFY arose.--Crestville 15:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, Angus Deayton was a comic actor, rather than a straight-up comedian. I know Kirsty Young probably wouldn't be able to do it full-time, what with her proper journalist commitments and Desert Island Discs nowadays. She's still best.--PaulTaylor 15:57, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boris 

message: There was at one time a splendid running gag/series of choice moments about Peter Mandelson - shortly after Matthew Parris outed him, so, 1998, I guess. And the Beeb had some kind of a clampdown about mentions of Mandelson, so naturally HIGNFY mentioned him at every possible opportunity. At least, that's how I recollect it - but I'm not quite confident enough in my knowledge to insert it. I'm hoping someone who remembers better will be jogged into adding it by this post ... --JennyRad 16:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well remembered! I've now added it. Chris 42 17:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peter Mandelson? 

message: I was wondering if there's a particular reason why in the 'Running Gags' section, Merton and Hislop are refered to as 'Paul' and 'Ian' and this is not the case in the rest of the article.  If there's a reason then obviously that's fine but I'm happy to change it if needs be. User:SamTrev  20:05, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no good reason I can think of, other than people feel quite familiar to them after all these years.--Crestville 10:30, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  First names or surnames 

message: I added the  tag and would like to explain. There are many instances of unencyclopedic language, e.g. "she proceeded to give Ian Hislop five points straight off the bat." straight off the bat is not formal language. Neither is "But it could have been worse" "Naturally, the HIGNFY team took great delight in flouting this directive" "Occasionally, or, in other words, if there's time to fill" and regarding the famous News of the World episode "Merton cried out 'This has been one news story of the week but the one I'm really interested in, Angus, is'" when in fact he said it at a pretty normal volume.
Also POV problems, a Michael Winner comment is called "regrettable" and the Hamiltons "managed to come through pretty well"
Finally are pure, silly jokes really at home here? "In a recent episode, the panel were discussing gay marriages and Paul turned to Ian, saying, "We're still on for the 20th, right?" "So far, Paul's theories have included that Boris has been knitted, he is a glove puppet from the neck down, he requires batteries and there is an electric current going through his chair to wake him up when he slows down." See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
The article is also heaving with unsourced information - I know it's all true because I've listened to the DVD commentary too - but not everyone can be expected to know this. Mark83 20:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inappropriate tone 

message: I've removed a lot of minor, non-notable jokes and incidents. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Any incident which we describe must have had a major impact or have historical significance, this should not be a list of every joke. For example a joke about KFC selling "troughs" of french fries. I found it funny but is not significant. I've left things like the Thatcher swallowing joke - Merton said on the DVD commentary that is was at that point one of the most talked about moments. Another example is the Piers Morgan thing. It is important not only because it was one of the worst performance by anyone in television history, but also because it's significant - the editor of a major newspaper responsible for reporting on people's private lives demanding his privacy. Mark83 00:17, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Choice moments/notable incidents

message: "Hislop was, afterwards, criticised for being intrusive about a woman's body, although the actual recording shows that he did not say anything on that subject."
What on earth is that supposed to mean? Criticised by whom, exactly? 217.155.20.163 00:54, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some newspaper--Crestville 16:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Intrusive about a woman's body" 

message: Maybe I'm going a bit too far back, but does anyone remember the episode where they spent half (or near half) the show coming up with new names for Pot Noodles. In a HIGNFY book that I got last (2006) Christmas, it says that the company gave the show a vast amount of Pot Noodles because of the free publicity. I was wondering, should this be in the "notable moments" section? --Skully Collins Edits 14:06, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pot Noodle 

message: Help
I am trying to write articles about Ian Maxwell and Kevin Maxwell, nothing litigious, however one has been deleted and the other is up for deletion.
Why does Wikipedia not have biographies of these two very significant businessmen?
Can anyone help. Johnnybriggs 03:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know so much about them, so I can only help by stating the significants of these two individulas in Britian in the early 90s, involved as they were in their father's biggest scandal and the defendnats in one of the biggset British litigations ever over the mirror pension fund. They are not just non-noteable children of Robert Maxwell, they are destestable arseholes in their own right. If you need any advice on how to make this come across in their articles, please contact me.--Crestville 10:36, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: re:they are being deleted because they is no information on them. Read the sources at the botom and use the information to form full articles on them.--Crestville 10:37, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Surely if someone meets WP:NOTE it doesn't matter if there is a full encyclopedia or a stub. A full article is good, a stub is bad, but neither should be deleted. Request for expansion is fine, but deletion could fall into disruption to make a point. -- Mark83 12:04, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Maxwells (I was tempted to use "Maxwell House as the header, but I won't)

message: I've changed the bit about Paula Yates, the truth is she didn't know what was going to happen in the show; this wasn't an act. I remember reading in one or two newspapers that Paula collapsed after the show and people just stepped over her, Michael was called for and took her home in tears. I do try and get all the facts before I make an edit, but this is something I know by heart. Thanks (INXS-Girl 14:40, 05 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What you know by heart, unfortunately does not count in Wikipedia. Your comments must be verifiable. ⇒ SWATJester On Belay! 00:31, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Paula Yates

message: Is this an encyclopaedic phrase? Smonnie 15:17, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Sailing close to the wind"

message: I thought I'd let you all know that I'm planning a fairly heavy set of edits to this article in the next 72 hours to try to restore an encyclopaedic tone, and to remove the large, unnecessary lists of information.  In particular, I think that a lot of the "notable" moments are going to be trimmed out - a running commentary of every hilarious thing is not necessary.  I think if you want that included, you will have to write separate stub articles on each of the episodes and include the information there.
If anyone wants to see how its progressing in the meantime, its at User:Fritzpoll/HIGNFY_Redraft.  Any comments to my talk page, please. --Fritzpoll 20:05, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As long as the show isn't referred to as HIGNFY throughout, that's fine with me. Nothing cheapens an article more than laziness. - Dudesleeper ·  Talk 20:15, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that's just to make the page easier for me to type out - it will be referred to as "Have I Got News for You" or "the programme" --Fritzpoll 21:30, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I wasn't referring to the article in your userspace. I was referring to this. - Dudesleeper ·  Talk 00:05, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Maybe the only way forward is for comments about episodes to be put in the relevant bit in List of Have I Got News For You episodes. Would take some editing though. Georgethe23rd 20:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite of article 

message: This section is too long, and filled with a lot of non-notable content. Unless there are (reasonable) objections, I'll be cutting it right down within the next couple of hours, at which point this talk page section can become a place for those that disagree to put forward a good reason to revert my edit. Appologies for the short notice, but tonight's a good night for me to do some serious editing, and I reasoned that some notice was better than none :). TheIslander 18:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Add to that the Notable Moments section, for exactly the same reason. TheIslander 18:54, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, I've done a bit. To be honest, I think I've been quite lenient, and really a few more from each section should go, but I'll leave that to someone else to do. TheIslander 18:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable moments & running gags 

message: This article needs more references to it, in particular references to certain episodes. You may want to use the citation templates in order to provide some help. ISD (talk) 14:30, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: To the anon who seems adamant that there was only one round of tabloid allegations about Angus Deayton, please check the dates of the BBC News sources quoted. The first occurrence was in May 2002 in Series 23 (which led to Paul Merton's News of the World t-shirt, etc.), while the second was the following October in Series 24 (when he was sacked after hosting two episodes). Please do not revert again. Thanks. Chris 42 (talk) 01:13, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deayton's sacking 

message: The section on the right hand side states that the 30 minute version of HIGNFY is "edited" and the 40 minute version is "unedited". This could do with being changed as both versions are in fact edited. This can be confirmed by the actual unedited versions of the Boris Johnson episodes (The Full Boris) which are actually a good hour or more in length which means that the 40 minute "Have I Got A Bit More News For You" episodes do still have plenty of the recorded content trimmed from them. I'd therefore propose changing this to something like "standard" for the 30 minutes version and maybe "extended" for the 40 minute version or something? Trippynet (talk) 11:54, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Very good point. I've now amended the infobox. :-) Chris 42 (talk) 11:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edited / unedited? 

message: A good 2/3 of this article appears to be original research and fancruft.  Like all of the sections Notable moments, Running gags and Frequent targets.   I see from the talk above that it appears to be a regular problem.  Anyone object to it going? --Escape Orbit (Talk) 21:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's definitely not encylopedic and should be drastically edited.  Unfortunately I fear that like Top Gear it's likely to return to its fan-boy style within days.  All power to your elbow if you do manage to spring-clean. TrulyBlue (talk) 22:06, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I'd be willing (if anyone wants me to) to try and add references to the episodes in which many of these events take place if necessary. That way any content should be far easier to verify. I don't think that the sections should be deleted however.Trippynet (talk) 19:11, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What makes a moment 'notable' though? To me, that would need to be reported/ commented in the media; if you have those sort of sources then fine. I don't think the issue with running gags is their verifiability, more whether they're notable. Same goes for targets. Ged UK (talk) 21:06, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly.  There are notable things mentioned in the article (by Wikipedia's definition of the word) that could have cites added with a bit of work.  But all the "Merton/Hislop said something funny" stuff added to the article clearly aren't notable.  It's notable that Paul Merton is a comedian and many people find him very funny, but notability of the specific examples are simply points of views and original research by individual editors.  It's all great stuff, but belongs on a fan-site, not an encyclopaedia.  What I intend to do is a bit of sourcing of cites for what seems most likely to be notable to me, but otherwise remove the rest.  If anyone can cite any of the rest, all to the good.  --Escape Orbit (Talk) 11:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original Research 

message: I'm not sure how relevent this is, but there is no mention of the rounds within the show. I think a new section should be added including this. The types of round could be added(such as the missing words round) and then what happens in each of them (such as headlines from obscure guest publications). Then further to this a little bit of the history about the round, like when it first appeared etc. should be added. A good source for information about it is here  Andypandy2020 (talk) 18:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I seem to recall there was a Rounds section, or it was in the format section. I can't remember what happened to it, though I think it may have had something to do with the vagaries of the rounds. I'm also not sure how reliable a source H2G2 is. Ged UK (talk) 19:39, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand that there is some variance in the rounds and some occur only once, so how about the section is called "recurring rounds" or something on those lines instead? Also, H2G2 is part of the BBC, so I think we can trust it as a reliable reference. Andypandy2020 (talk) 19:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's only hosted by the Beeb, it's written by 'normal people', just like Wikipedia, so if the info isn't sourced, then I don't think it would meet our requirements here. Ged UK (talk) 20:16, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Point taken about H2G2, so I've had a look for other sources and found this one . Do you think it is suitable as a source instead? Andypandy2020 (talk) 20:26, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Looks OK to me. Ged UK (talk) 20:30, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wonderful, I've made the change. Do you think it's ok?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andypandy2020 (talk • contribs) 20:57, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not bad. I've made a couple of changes to it as the odd-one-out round traditionally comes third rather than second. I've also added a mention for the Wheel of News which sometimes replaces the picture spin quiz. I've also mentioned the tabloid headline round which traditionally was the second round up until a few years ago. These details are all verifiable from the UKGameShows source. I've referenced it a second time after the "Whiteley/Countdown" detail.Trippynet (talk) 19:48, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rounds 

message: I've removed the same stuff that was discussed and removed a few months back.  Particularly the stuff from the sections Notable moments, Running gags and Frequent targets.  Before anyone adds them back in could they discuss it here please, and justify why it shouldn't be considered original research.  Additions to Wikipedia should be notable by Wikipedia's definitions. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 19:44, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed this material yet again.  Would 77.96.110.37 please either provide some justification for this material and explain why it isn't [WP:OR|original research]] or stop adding it.--Escape Orbit (Talk) 12:28, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original Research again 

message: Jack Dee is listed as having appeared as a guest host both 5 and 6 times. I have no idea which is right, so I haven't touched it, but someone should. 84.65.147.127 (talk) 17:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jack Dee discrepancy 

message: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,365645,00.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1025670/Have-I-Got-A-Court-Case-For-You-The-man-fell-sofa-watching-hit-TV-ended-arrest.html William Ortiz (talk) 10:49, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? The notability, if any, would be appropriate to an article about policing. The fact that he was watching HIGNFY isn't the significant part of the story for me. Ged UK (talk) 11:25, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Any ideas what article then? William Ortiz (talk) 07:24, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe Law enforcement in the United Kingdom, but I don't know whether the editors there will feel it fits there either. Maybe worth a try. Ged UK (talk) 07:27, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This should be added somewhere 

message: The whole section is just a reformatted list of List of Have I Got News For You episodes, and it's only going to get longer and more messy as the series' continue. I agree with putting the most often guest presenters up, and maybe the bit about appearing as a guest after appearing as a host, but why do we need the list of people who have only appeared on it once, when their names are already here? Any agreement to scrapping it? LicenseFee (talk) 21:56, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guest presenters 

message: I know there's a source for the show being "expanded into the UK equivalent of The Onion," but I hear there are plans to keep the show going into 2010, maybe later. Does anyone have a source for this? I can't seem to find one. It would useful to put on the main page so people know it's still going and didn't end this month.Cyrenaic (talk) 13:32, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  2010 Series? 

message: Just to say that since March 2010 there has been an official Have I Got News For You twitter feed which is here: @bbcHIGNFY
The show promotes chat on twitter by putting a graphic of the hashtag #HIGNFY at the front of each show to encourage viewers to debate. (This has been running since the Autumn series 2010). During the week and between series, Hat Trick posts topical jokes and encourage followers to take part in missing word rounds.
The twitter feed is edited by the show's executive producer Richard Wilson.
Hattrickdigital (talk) 08:33, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Twitter feed 

message: In the "Format" section, we have a paragraph that says:
:Over an hour's worth of material is recorded for each 30-minute programme on Thursday evenings for broadcast on Friday, allowing the programme to remain topical while the BBC's lawyers have time to request cuts of potentially slanderous material. "No reviewer could possibly review it in that time. We started off with an audience of two million, and somebody might have mentioned it to their friend, and then it sort of built up a momentum of its own."
This makes no sense at all. The paragraph starts out by talking about how much material is recorded, what is cut out, and ends in a (presumably validly) cited but unattributed quote that looks as if it has to do with how quickly the audience built when the show was starting out.
It's a total non-sequitur, or at least so it appears. Can someone with access to the context to the quoted bit come up with some way to make sense out of this? 192.35.35.34 (talk) 02:32, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something's amiss here 

message: Introduction fails to describe overall purpose of show.  After reading it, I am still not sure what the show is about.
CrocodilesAreForWimps (talk) 13:28, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Do Panel Shows have an overall purpose other than just to entertain? Narom (talk) 14:41, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Purpose - To put forward the BBC's leftist agenda in the form of "Precision Engineered" comedy.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.115.8.188 (talk) 15:42, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction fails to describe overall purpose of show 

message: * Robert Kilroy-Silk's "share or shaft" quote
* Eamonn Holmes weight jokes (not too many of those recently)
* Liz Truss's cheese quote and open pork markets in Beijing seem to be on their way to becoming 'running gags' also
2.30.100.89 (talk) 12:43, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Running gags 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Have I Got News for You. 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/20091201165659/http://www.nightlisteners.com/public/wait-wait-don%E2%80%99t-tell-me%E2%80%A6/ to http://www.nightlisteners.com/public/wait-wait-don%E2%80%99t-tell-me%E2%80%A6/
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) 20:33, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Edits to the Controversy section have removed the note on UKIP logging a police case against the show as below.
::In April 2015, the UK Independence Party complained to Kent Police over a false statement about candidate Nigel Farage, which would be in breach of electoral law. The police did not investigate, stating "The matter has been reviewed by officers but there's no evidence of any offences and there will be no further action.".
To my mind this meets all of the requirements for notability as in Wikipedia:Notability in that it:
*had significant coverage, the reference being a national news source;
*comes from a reliable source, the BBC, along with a quote from Kent Police;
*has wide sources - a google search finds stories in almost every major national newspaper;
*is independent of those involved - independently edited, and many independent sources (see the majority of press coverage);
*has direct quotes and is not presumed.
It also apoears to relate to an attempt by a national political party to pursue a criminal case against the show, and thus is I'd argue is probably relevant for a encyclopaedia entry (unless anyone knows different, I'm just going by what I'm reading?)
I beleive it should stay, but rather than get into an edit war with the editor that's removing it I'd like to gain some concensus.  What do other folks think?  Lkchild (talk) 22:45, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: For me, it is the "police involvement" issue more than anything else.  The police specifically chose not to be involved.  The media made a big hype over it during an election cycle, probably a slow news day.  No investigation, no consequences, a big fat pile of nothing.  This page is already overblown with the kind of cruft that I would love to take a weed-whacker to. This is an encyclopedia, not a fan page. Scr★pIronIV 23:14, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: If you were not even interested enough in the incident to describe what it actually was, that's a good indication that it's not worth including. I added the text describing what actually happened, but the removal of the whole thing is better. Something the police investigated could be of note; something they didn't is not. 124.159.170.92 (talk) 06:46, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Keep in mind this one didn't originate with me - I just came to correct it - I was mid-edit when it was removed.  On reading the actual reference (and others) they did investigate but determined there was no case to be had.  I'm not arguing this as a fan, just as an interested party.  This, to me, is a significant event, but if no other editors agree the concensus is with you.  Lkchild (talk) 19:36, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability of Farage-joke police involement 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Have I Got News for You. 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/20110608045207/http://www.offthetelly.co.uk/?page_id=338 to http://www.offthetelly.co.uk/?page_id=338
*Added  tag to http://www.err.ee/press/pressiteated_2008/teletaip_tuleb_tagasi/
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) 08:40, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I've removed again the addition of the Hattersley episode.  While it is common knowledge that the episode occurred, and a source discussing it shouldn't be hard to find, we most definitely need a good cite for the claim that Hattersely considered litigation. "Reportedly" isn't good enough.  And that's before consideration about what makes this "controversial" and suitable for inclusion in this section.  Where was the controversy? --Escape Orbit (Talk) 14:30, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hattersley 

message: Currently, the article says "On rare occasions Hislop and Merton have been absent from the programme" and "During this period, Hislop - who would be the longest serving member of the three on the programme since its premiere — was forced to be absent from one episode in 1994 due to appendicitis." I believe this is untrue, and that Hislop has never missed an episode. As I recall he checked himself out of the hospital to do the show despite his appendicitis, and had an appendectomy immediately after filming concluded. Given that level of devotion to being there, it seems churlish at best to claim he wasn't. A potential source to cite here is the Radio Times (https://www.radiotimes.com/news/tv/comedy/2017-10-06/have-i-got-news-for-you-15-facts/): "4. Paul Merton, Clive Anderson and Frank Skinner have occupied all three roles on the show — guest presenter, team captain, and panellist. But Ian Hislop is the only person to have appeared in every single episode, even during a bout of appendicitis in 1994." Also from the BBC (https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2012/hignfy-hosts): "Ian Hislop is the only person to have appeared in every episode - and in front of every guest host - despite suffering from a burst appendix shortly before one 1994 edition and having to go to hospital immediately after the recording." While this doesn't fully support my memory (neither includes the checking out of hospital part), it does tend to confirm that he did not miss the show... as does watching the episode.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.155.70.240 (talk) 14:20, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the statement and put in your source.  The source previously used in fact suggests the opposite of what was claimed in the article, and your source is much more clear about things. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 14:37, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ian Hislop's Attendance Record 

message: It would be pertinent to include that the opening theme was composed by George Webley, as it hasn't changed significantly since the series was created - I actually visited the page to find that information myself.
It could be included in the See Also section with Triffic Films.
Fohfuu (talk) 12:40, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Credit Opening Theme  

message: In parallel with the Wiki entry that gives a few details about each & every episode, I'd like to do the same for the 'Odd One Out' (OOO) round. Over the years, I've found this to be fascinating, producing the odd pearl (usually from Ian Hislop), such as the Norwegian Environment Minister calling John Gummer a "Drittsek" which is their word for a "Shitbag". There was a website that gave details up to about series 21, but that site appears to have closed down. That same site also had a few errors, relating to attaching a round to the wrong episode. At the moment, I'm having to resort to YouTube, but it doesn't show all episodes. To further complicate matters, some 30-minute episodes of HIGNFY didn't show the OOO, but it was included in the extended version of the same show. Is there anyone who knows if there still is such a site? I tried asking Hattrick, but they never responded. Similarly, is there a discussion forum on the 'net that deals with HIGNFY? Facebook is no good as the HIGNFY group seem to specialise in digging up dirt and eliciting opinion(s).
Thanks in advance
Taff Hewitt (talk) 18:06, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "Odd One Out" round