Talk:Jeopardy!

Covid 19 Pandemic

Does anyone think there should be something added about the show currently not being produced due to the pandemic? I think it has to do with production and would be a good addition to the article. Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 21:52, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

• I added information with sources to the "Broadcast History" section.CaffeinAddict (talk) 06:04, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Infobox and guest hosts

Presenter parameter in Template:Infobox television is for "The show's presenters or hosts. Presenters are listed in original credit order followed by order in which new presenters joined the show. Years or seasons should not be included." Temporary/guest hosts are not included, similarly to how guest hosts are not included in the infobox for The Tonight Show. Please stop adding guest hosts to the Jeopardy! article infobox. AldezD (talk) 03:33, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

• I have added a comment in the infobox markup that will hopefully discourage such repeated "drive-by" additions to it. --Kinu ^t/_c 23:54, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

With the recent news from today regarding Mike being picked as host, I would suggest we wait until the official announcement is released before adding in any information about who the permanent host ends up being. At this point, these articles seem to just be 'what a insider source is saying' and reads off like it could certainly change. Might (?) be worth mentioning the initial reporting from today when the official announcement news is put out, but don't think we need to add this current info in at the moment. As the Deadline article says, "Sony Pictures Television is expected to make an official announcement in the next few days."- I think we can wait... Magitroopa (talk) 01:21, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Agree "Advanced Negotiations to Become Permanent Host"≠"being picked as host". Wait until official announcement from WP:V source he has accepted offer. AldezD (talk) 12:14, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Might be fine to put in now (as long as it's worded properly...), but seems like we might have the official announcement coming soon. [1] Magitroopa (talk) 15:59, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Aaand updated. Magitroopa (talk) 17:03, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Just added the information regarding Richards + Bialik to the lead as best as I could. Don't think we need to include the citation here per MOS:LEADCITE. Also just saying that one of the previous sentences in that lead paragraph ("A series of interim hosts are currently moderating...") can probably be updated on Friday, once the guest hosts/season has concluded. Magitroopa (talk) 17:31, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Verb tense and passive voice

Please stop adding content using passive voice, which is inconsistent with the verb tense used throughout the article. This is not in line with MOS:VERB, which states: "By default, write articles in the present tense... However, articles about periodicals that are no longer being produced should normally, and with commonsense exceptions, use the past tense."

Additionally, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Clarity#Use of the passive voice recommends "that it be used sparingly".

"Was announced" is passive voice. "An April 2021 announcement listed" is written in the past tense.

Please follow WP guidelines.

Thank you. AldezD (talk) 13:16, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

MOS:VERB doesn't really have anything to do with this issue- that is more 'past vs. present' than 'anything vs. passive' (Such as how a president is still a president, even when no longer serving as president- or a television show still exists even when it has ended). Also note how it says, "Generally, do not use past tense except for past events..."- the announcement is a past event, as when it was first announced, it is no longer still being 'first' announced today, it's a past announcement. This also applies to where it says, "Tense can be used to distinguish between current and former status of a subject"- the subject would be the announcement, we are not saying, "The announcement is saying..." or anything like that.

Also, as I noted in my edit summary, apparently the previous sentence ("Between January and February 2021, additional guest hosts were announced...") is still fine though?... The word 'was' is simply changed to 'were' there, but that's somehow not problematic? It seems like you're picking and choosing what you want to be against at this point.

I'd assume that if the previous sentence is fine as I just said above, then, "The final group of season 37 guest hosts was announced in April 2021, including:..." should be fine too? Magitroopa (talk) 15:06, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm not going to re-state details in the guidelines already presented above. You clearly feel strongly against another editor making a simple WP:ME changing verb tenses to align with MOS. Then you revert to the original edit. If you revert the change again I'm not going to undo it. Have a great day. AldezD (talk) 15:37, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

First off, I already explained why this isn't an MOS:VERB issue, so I'm not exactly sure why you're saying you won't restate the details of the guidelines... That specific guideline seemingly has nothing to do with this issue.

Also, why all the reverts on here and then finally coming here to discuss? After you were initially reverted you should've come here first instead of edit warring, as I warned you on your talk page. I highly suggest you follow WP:BRD in the future. And how exactly does it help to come here and say you won't discuss the issue any further? I'm perfectly willing to discuss this, but how is doing all these reverts, finally coming here, and then deciding, "I won't revert anymore, goodbye" beneficial at all? It also appears you're ignoring some parts of what I've said, such as you being fine with the previous 'were announced' sentence, but wanting to keep reverting/rephrasing the 'was announced' sentence. Also worth noting that this revert is a lot more than a 'simple minor edit'- reverting the source, another part in a different section someone else added, and adding duplicate information (specifically regarding Bialik and Whitaker who were already mentioned in the previous sentence), which all led to a few edits that had to readd the information you removed, as well as remove the duplicate information you added in.

Please, I am seriously perfectly fine to discuss the issue and come to whatever solution, whether it be either of us misunderstanding something or a better rephrasing of the sentences altogether, but you need to be more cooperative and constructive rather than an, "I don't like this phrasing/verb tense" followed by multiple reverts to your preferred phrasing. Thank you. Magitroopa (talk) 16:37, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

I didn't say I won't discuss it further. I said I won't re-state the guidelines above because doing that is not productive in swaying you to consider them and to use consistent verb tense throughout the article. Regarding "all the reverts," I reverted re-addition of passive voice verb tense once and broke up a run-on twice. When new info was later added 21 April, I changed passive voice to another verb tense. That was not a revert.

You on the other hand have a pattern of reverting and accusing others of edit warring. You have been blocked for edit warring in the past. You are also perfectly capable of beginning the discussion on a talk page. But instead, you assume bad faith, revert, flail wildly in edit summaries stating it was "perfectly fine" the way it was, then template me on my talk page. This is not constructive behavior.

The tone of your reply demonstrates that you're worked up over something that I've already identified is WP:ME. I said I won't undo it again. Regarding me "being fine with the previous 'were announced' sentence", I would change it. But you'll revert it, and then it's back into the same loop. It's not productive since you'll revert the WP:ME anyway, so why take that action or make the case for it?

Editing Wikipedia is a hobby. It's not going to change the world. Perhaps you should focus your attention on why another user changing a verb tense results in such an acrimonious reaction for you. That may be a more productive use of your time. Or, you could follow your own suggestion of using WP:BRD in the future. Cheers. AldezD (talk) 17:38, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

Jeopardy!

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Keep It seems like this discussion has run its course and folks are pleased with the improvements. I see the maintenance tags have been addressed. Thanks all for your work keeping this up to code. Ajpolino (talk) 21:42, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

I am nominating this article for Good article reassessment for multiple reasons. The citation needed, page needed and Miscellaneous info tags alone would be more than enough, but there are also of couple a potential WP:COPYVIO Youtube refs (157 and 158), and the awards section doesn't talk about or source the specific awards in prose but rather just makes it dependent on a unsourced Succession box list. It may have met the criteria at the time it was promoted, but I don't think anyone predicted how even more popular this show got and thus there were probably less experienced editors infiltrating the article with unsourced info and trivia. Nonetheless, the issues are significant enough for a reassessment. 👨x🐱 (talk) 15:58, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

I agree in regards to the awards section- I came upon that recently and there is certainly no need to list predecessors or successors of when the show did win. Something similar to Whose Line Is It Anyway? (American TV series)#Awards and nominations would probably be more preferable. Would I be fine to go ahead and do that when I get a chance? Magitroopa (talk) 16:11, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Do whatever it takes to improve this. 👨x🐱 (talk) 16:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I wasn't the one who did most of the work to promote this to GA (that would be SethAllen623) but I do remember when this was going through the nomination process. I am away this weekend but am willing to work when I get back...let me know if anything else needs to be done beyond reference/source fixes and improvements. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 00:23, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Opps, my apologies. I looked at the edit history and it wasn't clear who the nominator was, so I assumed it was you. Sorry. 👨x🐱 (talk) 00:30, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

• I'll see if I can take a look at this. The article has gotten rather bloated with fancruft and I've tried to chainsaw some of it out, but it just keeps getting worse. I'm sure we can make this one a True Daily Double. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 00:02, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Where does this article stand now @Ten Pound Hammer, HumanxAnthro, and Bcschneider53:. Aircorn (talk) 06:47, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

@TenPoundHammer: Aircorn (talk) 06:48, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

missed @Magitroopa:. Aircorn (talk) 06:49, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

• • • Haven't had much time to take a look. I did try to trim some bloated text but I could use help on fixing the awards section and seeking feedback on what other bloat to remove. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 06:53, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

@TenPoundHammer: I know what I said above, but you're more than welcome to do that if you want to. I might check it out/redo the table tomorrow (currently 3:40am for me...)- just had never gotten around to it, like a whole bunch of other stuff I've been wanting to get to. I've been in the Jeopardy-mood lately (and have been cleaning up Mike Richards (television personality) since the recent news...), so will try to use that to my advantage. :P Magitroopa (talk) 07:40, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

• Fixed some of the mentioned issues. The rest seems alright, good enough to keep it as a good article in my opinion. Aircorn (talk) 23:41, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
  • The recent scandal involving the newly-announced host (who was shortly thereafter out following the scandal about his sexual comments) may affect the article's stability, so I'd wait until that settles so that we can come to a conclusion. 👨x🐱 (talk) 21:47, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
    • @HumanxAnthro: How about now? It is coming up five months which is long enough. I can close it myself if you are happy with the article, or I will request a closure from an uninvolved editor. Aircorn (talk) 02:40, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
      • This needs a citation: "In the show's history with Trebek's version, there were only six occasions where all three contestants ended the game with zero dollars." Also, it's been that long already? 👨x🐱 (talk) 03:28, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Inclusion of Mike Richards in infobox

Should Mike be included in the infobox as an official presenter? Granted, he was officially announced as one of the permanent hosts, but I think this should be contingent upon whether he is introduced as such (vs. as a "guest host") when his episodes air in September. Personally, I think his name should be removed from the infobox until we know for sure. --Bp0413 (talk) 02:52, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

If he taped episodes as host after being named permanent host, keep him in even though "he resigned". AldezD (talk) 13:12, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

IMHO it might be best to wait & see how his episodes are aired in September (we know they will be airing currently), but I do think they could easily redub it. I'm fine with his name staying in the infobox and then removing it based on when his episodes do air (or vice versa, removing his name now and then readding it based on when his episodes do air) but either way, I think the final consensus would likely come when his episodes do air... also keep in mind that we don't need to immediately decide now... if the premiere date (September 13) isn't changed even with all this production craziness going in right now, it is less than a month away from the premiere date. Magitroopa (talk) 19:21, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

In the Alex Trebek days, Johnny would overdub the morning show intros after someone else had done the initial intros. That way, Johnny only had to be there for the afternoon tapings. What with COVID, he might be doing all of them that way now. In any case, unless there's some advance info from a reliable source, the only way to know for sure is to wait and see how Johnny introduces him when the shows air. And even though his "permanent" slot only lasted a week (one day's worth of tapings), then for now he should be in the infobox, for completeness. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:14, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

And for those who didn't see the first show of the new season, Richards was announced as "Host", not "Guest host". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:39, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

None of your observations about announcers dubbing voiceovers or words used to refer to the host are referenced. It's not "the only way to know for sure". Richards was the host of five shows before he was fired, and that detail is referenced in the article. AldezD (talk) 13:02, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

I could look for where I read that, if you're interested. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:01, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

It's buried in this article.[2] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:56, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

And Mayim Bialik today was likewise introduced as "Host", not "Guest host". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:21, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

...which has been referenced in section #Hosts and announcers since 8/23/21: "Mayim Bialik, Ken Jennings to Host Jeopardy Through 2021 After Mike Richards’ Exit". AldezD (talk) 12:52, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Were those sources privy to how they were actually announced on-air? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:00, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Announcers using terms "on-air" do not alter how Bialik is referenced as "host" in a WP:V citation titled "Mayim Bialik, Ken Jennings to Host ‘Jeopardy’ Through 2021 After Mike Richards’ Exit". AldezD (talk) 13:17, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

There is no better source than the show itself. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:09, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, there are—the sources already linked in the article that meet WP:V. AldezD (talk) 18:18, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

And where did those allegedly valid sources get their information? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:25, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Certainly not from the announcer's copy/spoken word. The sources follow WP:V. AldezD (talk) 20:57, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

The only place your so-called source could have gotten it is from the show. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:03, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

From the production team of the show—not from what the announcer or his copy says. I don't know or understand why you are calling a reference which meets WP:V "so-called". AldezD (talk) 21:54, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Which would be precisely where Johnny Gilbert gets it from. But if he said "guest host", that would override your source. But he didn't so it doesn't. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:46, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

No, it wouldn't override a WP:V source. AldezD (talk) 12:54, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Mayim Bialik

Have there been any "special episodes of the show" hosted by anyone other than Fleming or Trebek? If so, those hosts should either be included or Bialik removed for consistency IMO. Bahooka (talk) 01:44, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Agreed, but none to my knowledge. Jmill1806 (talk) 14:28, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

I think this is a new thing invented by the show's owners. Prior to this, the only thing that comes to mind is an April Fool's Day show when Trebek and Pat Sajak switched places in hosting Jeopardy and Wheel of Fortune. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:24, 28 August 2021 (UTC)