Talk:High Rollers

message: Just yet, does that mean GSN is getting rights to High Rollers?
I don't know what just yet means.
--Nextbarker 06:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  High Rollers on GSN 

message: When you're citing the same source multiple times, using the <ref name="name"> tag, you don't need to fully repeat the URL, title, etc. Simply place  instead, and it will duplicate the entry as a citation. Saves some typing (be sure you have a space between the title and the backslash). Hope that's helpful! Ariel♥Gold 17:04, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, I always wondered how that worked! Thanks! Time to copy that into my little wikipedia notepad document. :D FamicomJL 17:08, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: By the way

message: Hello,
I have now reviewed this article as per the Good article criteria and have commented in detail below:
Well written FAIL. 
Please refer to the Manual of Style for suggestions on how to improve this article. In particular I am concerned about the use of multiple ways of referring to the program. Used in the article are "High Rollers", "HR", "the show", etc. 
Other issues include the lack of consistency in referencing dates and times listed for the program. eg. 6.30p.m. and 10:30 are used in the same section. Consider standardising the method you use to reference these. Check out the Manual of Style for more info.
Sections such as "Foreign Versions" contain only one line of information. Perhaps this could be either expanded and/or rolled into another section. 
Factual accuracy FAIL
I understand the issues raised in the talk page of this article, but sections of this article still lack any references whatsoever. For example, Episode Status. 
Coverage PASS
The article seems to cover the topic very well.
Neutrality PASS
I am satisfied that this article is written from a Neutral Point of View.
Stability PASS
The article shows no recent edit warring, and the article does not change dramatically from day to day.
Images PASS
The images used cover the topic well and are used correctly.
-
As a result of the above concerns I have failed the article at this time, as I do not believe that it is likely the article can be brought up to GA Status within 7 days, and as such placing the article at On Hold status wouldn't be beneficial.
The article is certainly coming along however, and the editors should be proud of the work they have done so far. Feel free to contact me on my talk page for more information, or if you have any questions or comments on my review. Pursey 12:46, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, thanks for the review. I shall try to fix these errors for a review in the future. FamicomJL 01:46, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good Article Candidate Review 

message: Can anyone clarify this part?
which meant that a roll of 2 (aka "Snake Eyes" 1-1) was the only safe roll whether the number itself was on the board or not. Likewise, a roll of 12 (aka "Boxcars" 6-6) was always safe too, whether any numbers on the board that could add up to 12 were still in play or not.
Why was 2 the "only safe roll", and how can this be true if 12 is also safe? Needs clarifying TheHYPO (talk) 11:44, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've always thought that part was ridiculously wishy-washy as well. Re-writing it or removing it would probably be a good idea. I have seen quite a few episodes, and those rolls never came up as always safe rolls. But then again, my memory is cloudy, haven't watched the show in awhile. Best bet for now is to remove it. FamicomJL (talk) 14:25, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't think I understand that either.  It's been a long time since I last remember it being on the air, and it seems no channel is airing it right now, so I'm not sure what that means.  Can whoever wrote that section in the article give some insight?  If nobody can somehow explain how that statement is true I'd agree with FamicomJL that that line should be taken out. --Zidane2k1 (talk) 04:59, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rolling doubles? 

message: Almost every reference used on this site was someone's personal website (except for one link which was broken). I have removed all the personal websites from the article, as I feel they do not meet WP:RS or WP:EL. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 13:55, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad references removed 

message: On the site http://gameshows.wikia.com/wiki/High_Rollers there is a VERIFIED screenshot of the opening titles to the 1974 High Rollers series. How do I get permission to upload this shot to the article??  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blozier2006 (talk • contribs) 05:31, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Just FYI, most of the text of the article on that site is taken from this article. JTRH (talk) 12:13, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  screenshot of HR 74 FOUND!! 

message: I can't find a single reliable source that says anything about Lucky Numbers. Furthermore, it's original research to call it a revival of High Rollers. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 05:30, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lucky Numbers