Talk:PlayMania

message: If you live on the west coast forget about playing. GSN dosnt show it live, and by the time it airs in the pacfic time zone, its allready to late to enter  to have them call you. You can allways try to enter anyway and hope you can wing it and just get an easy question. I failed miserably.
I added that you have to be 18 to play and i fixed the time, it didn't say when it ended and had some issues with the flow of the language. --~~WalterWalrus3~~
*Pacific time isn't the standard time used in reference. It's been reverted back to EST. Chad1m 02:50, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was on again on August 4.
I was recently on twice. I was on the November 9th episode with Jessica York and I won $100 for the first time. I did not record it but if anyone has a copy, email me back and let me know. I was also on a day later with Shandi Finnessey but didn't win. I am hoping to be on again because it is a fun show to watch. --~~Derrick2006~~ 03:27, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Extraneous comments (before header was placed)

message: Any idea who she is? All I was able to dig up with a quick search was that she is or was a presenter on Quiz Nation and that she is or was a brunette. Erechtheus 06:00, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hannah Peckham 

message: I think I get what you're getting at with the latest edit, but I think there is probably an even more effective way of saying what you're saying so it's clear to even somebody who didn't watch the marathon and PlayMania last night. I think what happened is that Bil was there live in what is also the PlayMania studio to do live introductions to the episodes. The episodes themselves were already pre-taped. What I think is missing is that there was a marathon the same night and that Dwyer was there from it only because he was doing live intros to taped material. 
Am I making sense? Erechtheus 19:53, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bil Dwyer? 

message: Chad, I added info about the July 29th episode to the specific episodes. However, my wording isn't exactly 100% understandable, so feel free to reword what I have said. :-) --TRAiNER4 TC 15:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I added episode July 29th 

message: Are you a PlayManiac? If so, Chad has created a userbar for PlayManiacs. I have taken the liberty of turning it into a shortcut so that it is easier for you (the user) to use. To use the userbar, simply place  in your user page. It should come out to something like this:
Enjoy! :-) --TRAiNER4 TC 01:05, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice work. Are there instructions you could point me to for making a shortcut like this? Erechtheus 01:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As I am not 100% familiar with all of WikiPedia's pages yet (I'm at like 90%), I'm sure Chad can help you out with this. --TRAiNER4 TC 01:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New PlayManiac Userbar box 

message: I have a proposal. For the past 3 PlayMania weeks, there have been themed emails being read. I have a suggestion. If the themed emails continue for at least another week, we should split them into their own subsection under "Trivia" listing all the themes done thus far. I'd love to hear what everyone has to say and we'd need to know what themes and dates have been done so far. The list I have thus far is:
* July 13 - Best/worst pickup lines
* July 14 - Biggest lies
* July 15 - What celebrity do you best look like?
* July 20 - ??
* July 21 - ??
* July 22 - Ask Mel - Viewers would email Mel for advice
* July 27 - ??
* July 28 - Things people have won (Of course Chad would know about this one :P)
* July 29 - What would you say to get past Shandi's dad to go on a date with her?
Now, one of the missing dates is fashion disasters, but I forget which day that was. There are 2 more themed email episodes that I forget what they are. Please help me out with this one. Please post a reply, do not edit the current list, as we want to keep posts as they originally were when posted. Thank you.
— JT (TRAiNER4) TC 18:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the idea, but it may be better to list them generally by date but lead with the topic, like this:
* Best/worst pickup lines (July 13)
* Biggest lies (July 14)
* Fashion disasters (date unknown)
That way, we can account for items when the date is uncertain. Erechtheus 23:15, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Tonight (August 4) was sport's fans, and my boyfriend and I's email got on there. --*kate speak 06:08, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A proposal for a subsection on the PlayMania page 

message: So, I went ahead and took up on your guys' suggestions and created an email theme chart in the email subsection. I took out all the email notes from after July 13 in the trivia section and put them in the chart. I hope you guys like it. If you have any questions or suggestions, just lemme know. Also, did you guys hear the news? Starting at the end of the month, PM will be on Sunday nights, too. I won't be able to watch regularly, obviously, because I have school, but it's cool nonetheless. - Chad1m 02:11, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since it's starting on the 27th, I'll be able to see this twice, as I don't start back up in school till the 6th of September. I'll let you know how things go :) — JT (TRAiNER4) TC 04:33, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll be able to see the first (and maybe second, because I may be gone) Sunday episode, and then any episode when I have a 3-day weekend. Other than that, it's Sunday sadness for Chad. =D - Chad1m 04:46, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's Thursday and Sunday sadness for the JT too =] — JT (TRAiNER4) TC 14:14, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

text: OK, OK, my wording sucks. Cut me some slack people :P — JT (TRAiNER4) TC 16:59, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charts/New Day 

message: Is anybody interested in a chart of who hosted PlayMania and on what dates they hosted? I am curious to know who has hosted most often. I think I have a fairly accurate list of recent shows but not so much the April and May shows. And I wouldn't have the vaguest idea of how to make such a chart. Randrall
:There are too many episodes to count. The table would get too huge, although you could do something like this:
::
Host            	No. Episodes Hosted
Mel Peachey     	—
Shandi Finnessey	—
Hannah Peckham  	2
 — JT (TRAiNER4) TC 01:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And there would be no way (unless someone recorded EVERY show) to count up all 53 shows. I've thought about it before, but I don't think it'll happen. - Chad1m 13:18, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Looks good, I recommend you get started on something like PlayMania/Host_Chart or something. That's too big to go on the main page. — JT (TRAiNER4) TC 14:16, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chart of who hosted PlayMania and when. 

message: ...but I fixed the themes table for you, Chad. I know you didn't mean to almost screw it up by removing a table cell from it :| — JT (TRAiNER4) TC 14:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Shhhhh... I had a long day last night, so I wasn't paying much attention to the table. Lo siento, but at least it's fixed now. ;) Chad1m 18:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Be proud.. I didn't eff it up this time. =D - Chad1m 05:26, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I know you didn't mean to do it... 

message: ...to combine both of our August 11 show notes... now, my note is the entire thing that happened. The prizes were multiplied by 5 of the original amount, making the top available prize $400. And I did hear Shandi say this was the top prize ever won, as in the July 14 mixup did not occur... — JT (TRAiNER4) TC 14:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done and done. ;) - Chad1m 00:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  We have to figure out a way... 

message: I left you a message on your talk page but you seem to not care. Do me a favor and stop effing with the page. You know it's unwanted and now you're just trying to be the last user to edit it. Please quit or else I'll report you to the admins for messing with a page to a) just screw with it or b) to piss others off. - Chad1m 04:14, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: First off, I created this page. Second off all, I've won $15 on the show, thank you very much. Third off all, use four tildes to mark your name, 67.162.86.200, as if we didn't know it was you to begin with. - Chad1m 04:27, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I watched the AlphaBucks game and I saw that Chad did infact win money. Get your facts straight, anonymous Illinois Comcast user... — JT (TRAiNER4) TC 14:08, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You've been reported. - Chad1m 04:37, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't know what your problem is, 67.162.86.200, but you need to stop. Information on Wikipedia pages have to be formal. The formal title for "weird and wacky talents" is called "Unique talents." You need to lay off, else, the page could wind up being locked out of anonymous user editing. — JT (TRAiNER4) TC 04:39, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's give a round of applause to Goldom for temp. blocking this dingbat. - Chad1m 05:13, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't think so. He was probably starting trouble and just getting angry that he was continuously getting shut down. - Chad1m 19:07, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User_talk:67.162.86.200|67.162.86.200]] 

message: I added a part that will contain info about specific games (i.e. games not finished that will continue on next game)......the asshole deleted it 'this info isnt nessesary'. ya right....bullshit  Walchop825 05:41, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Excuse me, but language and attitudes like that aren't tolerated in this part of Wikipedia. First off, you need to add all additions to the talk page at the bottom, not the top. I have changed it to it's proper locale. Now, onto your complaint. First off, I'm "the asshole," thank you very much. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an up-to-the-minute PlayMania newspaper. Occasions like the one you keep trying to add are few and far between and a total section dedicated to them is unnecessary. If you have any more complaints or concerns, post them here in a proper manner rather than flying off the handle. — Chad "1m" Mosher  Email Talk  Cont. 06:58, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New part

message: Last night saw the premier of "Name the Catch Phrase," but I have a question... what is the game in the game actually called? For example, VA DERS would be Space Invaders... My sister used to be a pro at all of these, and she doesn't even remember what it is called. If anyone has any ideas, please let us know so we can put a reference (well not a , but you get the idea) in the game description. Thank you. — JT (TRAiNER4) [TC][E] 15:15, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The closest thing I can think of is a rebus, but I don't even know if that's appropriate. — Chad "1m" Mosher  Email Talk  Cont. 18:58, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, they are rebuses. Erechtheus 19:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would simply call it "Catch Phrases," just like the title said. A better word for rebuses is Brain Teasers, but my best bet is to go with "Catch Phrases." Johnsprogram 07:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's the actual game called? 

message: I have moved this table to its own transclusion page. The PlayMania article page was vastly approaching the 30KB size (it was sitting at ~28KB) and to prevent possible data loss for Firefox users (like me) and google toolbar users, I moved it so that can be pretty much avoided. — JT (TRAiNER4) [TC][E] 13:06, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It should just be dropped, that's just pure fancruft for a low-rated late night show on a minor cable network, I'd just scrap it. Renosecond 02:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's actually higher rated than you think. The E-Mail theme table is relevant and useful, as many people go around asking "what was the theme on so and so day?". It should stay. — JT (TRAiNER4) [TC][E] 18:16, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The PlayMania E-Mail Themes table 

message: Since the email themes list is getting insanely longer than anticipated, that a sub page be created and that the email themes contained a link to the email themes page. Up to you Chad. — JT (TRAiNER4) [TC][E] 10:27, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Been taken care of. ;) — Chad "1m" Mosher  Email Talk  Cont. 00:17, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal 

message: I don't know what your intentions are, but stop removing and changing things on the PlayMania article page. The info there is not cruft. At any rate, I have emailed Chad of your actions, he'll deal with this in his own matter. I'm just giving you fair warning as you don't want to endure the same fate as 67.162.86.200 did. — JT (TRAiNER4) [TC][E] 00:01, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Onehead", I do not know what your agenda is, but you obviously do not care about the hard work put into this entry. Please quit reverting and removing things or I will have you referred to the admins. — Chad "1m" Mosher  Email Talk  Cont. 00:11, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I wasn't vandalizing anyting. This entry just has a lot of needless details on it that really aren't relevant to WP. I don't appreciate being threatened, this show is not as important as it seems. I will take this matter further. Giant onehead 03:29, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Considering you recently vandalized a user's page for no reason, I can't exactly consider all of your motives positive. Sorry. — Chad "1m" Mosher  Email Talk  Cont. 03:56, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't really consider you having many positive motives yourself. You should look more closely to my contributions to begin with. I asked for meditation to help out with the page. And I would like to refer you to WP:AGF and WP:OWN. Giant onehead 04:54, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you're one of those PlayMania Haters/Bashers, I suggest you stop while you're ahead, as any vandalism you commit from here on in will be reported to an administrator. I don't know what your intentions are, but I recommend you stop, or you may find yourself warned or possibly blocked. This is not a threat. I or Chad will report you. Also, me and Chad have all the positive intention of keeping this page as accurate and informative as possible. I'm sorry if you feel that we aren't doing this properly, but we feel that we are. We are following all the policies properly. — JT (TRAiNER4) [TC][E] 14:22, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't hate the show, and I'm not vandalizing. I'm trying to improve the article and it is a bit lengthy and should be simplified and some details should be removed. The article should provide a concise overview of the show, not have every detail plastered on it. If you want to have those details, you can make your own website for it. I also direct you to WP:NOT and keep in mind what is at the bottom of a page when you edit it: "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it." If you want to "report" me, that's fine, then maybe you can understand better that I'm just trying to help the article and not vandalize it. I will refrain myself from editing the article for a bit until things settle. Giant onehead 15:13, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Another useful page for everyone involved in this edit/revert war: Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. RobJ1981 17:41, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I need Chad's input on this matter, since he's the one who technically created the page — JT (TRAiNER4) [TC][E] 18:13, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The person that created the page, does NOT matter in this situation. The creator is not the owner of the page. It's easy to understand. There isn't much else to say, if people just won't realize that fact.  RobJ1981 19:00, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attention: [[User talk:Giant onehead|Giant onehead]] 

message: As there is a disagreement on whether to include PlayMe awards, I think we should discuss the pros and cons of including this section here before taking action. On the one hand, Wikipedia is not paper, and articles have no length limits (other than by technical constraints, in which case articles can be split up). Thus, if it is important for the show, I think it should be included. However, I am not sure if this is the case. Thoughts? -- Where 18:39, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason I removed that section at first was due to that I don't think it's important for an overview of a show.  This article should just focus on the games, hosts, maybe a trivia section, not a bunch of quasi-crufty "awards".  Those "awards" are just silly and lighthearted, lots of shows do things like that and it isn't instantly notable, if ever.  Again, if this info could be used in a fan page or such, go ahead.  We are building an encyclopedia, not including details on everything that happens on a fairly low-rated cable network's late night lineup. I really don't know the ratings of this program, and I do watch it from time to time, but you can't possibly tell me that this show is worthy of a article the size of Desperate Housewifes.  A set of joke awards are not important to the show, and the article reads better without it. 
I have a few other suggestions to improve the article and make it more consise than my explanation here:
*Move the info about Hannah, the sub-host from the intro into a trivia section, she's only hosted 2 eps, and it would place better in the trivia section. 
*Really watch the POV words and neutralize them, it comes up quite a bit throughout the article.
*It's nice that the list of "Playmania E-mail themes" got spilt off, but if this show lasts for years and years, I'd suggest deleting it and maybe one of you could make a webpage with the info, since you've worked at it. 
*Maybe get rid of the "special games" section and spin that off into a site. Those are obviously one-time games and appear rather crufty, WP is not a discriminate source of infomation.
Basically, the page should be trimmed and those trying to help out should not be threatened and ridiculed. I hope my suggestions can be considered and used. Giant onehead 19:08, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hannah stuff done, POV still needs fixing, the email themes should stay unless there's word that PlayMania's going to remain a permanent game show. They keep saying it's a promotion for GSN, but it's beginning to not be that way. Special Games section was removed also. I hope this clears things up a little bit. — JT (TRAiNER4) [TC][E] 20:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm happy with what's there. Thanks Chad. — JT (TRAiNER4) [TC][E] 21:02, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should PlayMe awards be included? 

message: I just removed this link. In spite of the apparent misuse of the word "official", this does not appear to be in any way an officially sanctioned Playmania or Peachey site. As such, it would not be an appropriate external link. Erechtheus 22:41, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fan group removed 

message: Why were the changes I made this morning reverted without explanation? Please review WP:OWN. I understand that I'm not a frequent contributor to this content, but that does not mean my edits constitute vandalism or anything else that should simply be reverted. I'm not looking for ownership of this content, and I welcome any improvements to what I have written. Treating those contributions as vandalism is not improvement. In fact, it could be considered vandalism.Erechtheus 18:21, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not saying it's vandalism. I just find it's not necessary to convert first names to last names. Their last names are rarely mentioned on the show, thus the first names are used as a familiarity tool.  — JT (TRAiNER4)  [T·C·E] 23:54, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd suggest that WP:MOSBIO gives us our best guidance on the issue. In particular, I would point out, "it is better to refer to the person by their surname and not their first name, even if the subject is not controversial. The use of the first name gives the impression that the writer knows the subject personally, which, even if true, is not relevant." It seems to me that given this article's reputation for cruft, it would be best to strike a formal tone. I'd certainly like to hear more discussion on the matter. Erechtheus 00:01, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Though it may be more proper, using the last names just comes off as really weird. It just doesn't feel right for this article. — Chad "1m" Mosher  Email Talk  Cont. 05:01, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What if you just say "the hostess will read an e-mail" or the like?  That is much simpler and you curb this debate. Giant onehead 07:41, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert 

message: I continue to remove the chat room in the external links area because the fansites listed are comprehensive tributes. No offense, but anyone can make a chat room for themselves, so it is not notably notable. — Chad "1m" Mosher  Email Talk  Cont. 05:20, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Although you are entitled to your opinion it is there as a place for playmania players to go and chat and discuss answers during the game and it does comply with all external links rules. I would like a second opinion on this myself. Although you may not find it useful there are those that do. lagwag0n 21:12, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:EL  — JT (TRAiNER4)  [T·C·E] 13:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

text:  Are there any other non-fan links that could be added? Link standards allow for the one fan site, but it would be nice if there was a better ratio than 1:1 between fan sites and more encyclopedic coverage. Erechtheus 02:12, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  PlayMania Chat 

message: What's the deal with Vince Roberts being listed as a new host? Subwayguy 17:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't add it, so I'm working on validating it or not. If it's not valid, then it's being removed. I've given the contributer a week to provide a cite for it.  — JT (TRAiNER4)  [T·C·E] 18:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the moderator on GSN's forums, the Vince Roberts information is not accurate.  Jclinard 00:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vince Roberts? 

message: The parts of the article that are unreferenced all deal with common knowledge. I don't understand why, after 9 months you guys decide to attack the article, but it's uncalled for. There are no sources/references for the information on the page. If you remove the information, you'll pretty much destroy the article.  — JT (TRAiNER4)  [T·C·E] 01:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. It takes no effort to add a tag, which does nothing to make the article better. Instead, we should work together to improve the article. Casey Abell 19:07, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In a related note, an editor keeps removing the comment about the only time, in nearly 200 episodes, that this live show failed to air. The editor uses a notability argument, and I disagree. In my opinion, this failure was clearly a notable event in the show's programming history, and the brief, accurate comment on the failure (77 words) is hardly disproportionate. But it's not worth an edit war. I only ask other editors to consider the deleted material to see if it should be restored. Thanks. Casey Abell 22:40, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree I have to agree with Casey on this one as it's notable because the one and only episode that went dark and did not air was that episode in May.  — JT (TRAiNER4)  [T·C·E] 01:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

text: A television show not airing as scheduled is in no way whatsoever notable in and of itself.  If the episode did not air because of a notable reason, and you have a reliable 3rd party source to cite that says the episode did not air for such a reason, then it would be acceptable to add to the article.  But television shows not airing as scheduled is a pretty common event in broadcasting and not a notable thing to occur.  Cheers. L0b0t 01:35, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This reasoning by L0b0t is why I keep removing the info.  This is supposed to be an overview article, not a place to put every event related to the show.  Technical glitches happen all the time in television, and it's not usually necessary to put those instances in the article.  This info only (if that) appeals to hardcore fans of the show, and not to normal readers.  I would also like to cite WP:OWN in that no one or group of editors owns an article, and that editing by other editors is encouraged.  We're all trying to help, and to just revert something because someone else edited an article is pretty faulty reasoning. Booshakla 19:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

text: The excised passage is also bloated and redundant.  It says in a paragraph, something that the infobox already says using just 16 characters (4 digits, 1 word, and a footnote.) L0b0t 20:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We're making progress, but I'm still not sure that even the footnote should even be there.  It's from a message board, and I don't think that fits WP:RS.   Booshakla 03:14, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

text: So basically, you are saying the entire article has to be trashed. Congratulations.  — JT (TRAiNER4)  [T·C·E] 04:15, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: NO, NO, not at all.  I was just trying to paraphrase our editorial policies.  Please go check out WP:WAF (writting about fiction), WP:EPISODE (television specific guide), and for sourcing requirements: WP:V, WP:OR, and WP:RS.  These policies and guidelines explain it better than I can.  Cheers. L0b0t 15:42, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I see where you're coming from, but how can you reference everything that you have watched on television? Obviously some television shows are written about to an excessive extent, but shows like PlayMania don't get too much press, and the articles about such shows have to rely on what people have observed while watching. The only disadvatage is that these shows won't become good/featured articles. If someone really wants to find information, this appears to be accurate because it has been written directly after watching the show, unlike writing about shows that aired before Wikipedia was created. bmitchelf•T•F 01:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreferenced/Unsourced claims 

message: It seems to me that the two shows have the right to have their own pages since they are two separate shows. People will keep creating the pages anyway, so it's better than a revert war, especially with name-calling. bmitchelf•T•F 19:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. I believe it's better that they stay in the one article for now until they literally premiere. If it's significant enough then, then yes, they should get their own page. But for now, they should stay in the one article.  — JT (TRAiNER4)  [T·C·E] 19:32, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I've broken them off (rather well I think) into two separate pages. I hope everyone likes them, and if you think there is a problem, please mention it on the talk page rather than deleting and reverting everything. — Chad "1m" Mosher  Email Talk  Cont. 07:01, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: PlayMania Block

message: I wanted to let everyone know that I added a short statement regarding the "PlayMes" award. (I think it was actually called "PlayMe," but I'm not sure.)
On Sunday August 27, Danny Bonaduce, the host of Starface, made an appearance on the show to represent the three winners for the "PlayMes" awards.
I didn't include who were the three winners since I currently do not know.
Johnsprogram 07:40, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Danny Bonaduce's appearance 

message: We should list the retired games that was on PlayMania as well, such as Word Cuts, Lingo, and more. Maybe put under the heading "retired games," or maybe "inactive games".
Johnsprogram 08:50, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Retired Games 

message: I have rated this article as start class because the relatively short length and lack of important sections like critical response, production etc. and as low importance because there is little to distinguish it from other articles about television series. There is a lot of unsourced information in the article check WP:Verifiability for advice on sourcing. There are a few instances of references with a space before them - they should come straight after the phrase or sentence they relate to. Why is this show notable compared to other gameshows? I didn't get a sense of that from the article.
These categories are arbritrary and are subject to review by any editor who feels confident to do so. Please note that a more formal assessment by other editors is required to achieve good article or featured article status. I used criteria from the television wikiproject guidelines here, article about TV series guidelines here and the assessment guidelines here.--Opark 77 11:32, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article assessment

message: The statement that contestants can enter online for free in this article did not in fact prove to be the case for me.  I entered using their online form (not by texting them anything) and discovered that I had a 20.00 monthly subscription triggered by them on my next Verizon bill.  There is a fair amount of discussion right now in both print and online media regarding this type of occurrence.  Most of the discussion is around the fact that texting something to a company such as this may not trigger just one time per message charges but may also trigger a 20-30$ premium messaging subscription by your carrier.  In my case, it was even worse, since I used the supposedly free online form to enter and still got dinged on my cell carrier bill for 30/month.  I realize this isn't the place for specific complaints against playmania, but the fact that this article contains no criticisms of the company/product nor does it reference any of the current controversy over companies generating income by texting charges (similar to the 1-900 number debacle that ended up in congress) seems an omission.
129.59.8.10 22:04, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversy over messaging fees

message: :Image:PlayMania-block.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 02:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, yeah... fixed the rationale problem. —TRAiNER4 (talk • contrib) 04:37, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:PlayMania-block.png

message: I added "the most notorius game" part because it often burned a lot of time on PlayMania.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.215.29.137 (talk) 17:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added to the Find the Letters Game.