Talk:Jimmy Carr

A couple of corrections

He was a virgin until 26 according to himself on BBC's "would I lie to you?" He attended Burnham Grammar School in Buckinghamshire up till sixth form when he moved to RGS — Preceding unsigned comment added by Canwetakearide (talk • contribs) 03:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

His virginity is not currently mentioned? But the schools seem to be correct. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Irish

The article clearly states: "He has dual British and Irish citizenship, travels on an Irish passport, has spoken of his pride in having Irish ancestry, and was presented in 2013 with a certificate of Irish heritage in his parents' home city of Limerick by the city's mayor." The source is this one. So the fact he is British-Irish is neither "lies" nor "a typo". Martinevans123 (talk) 10:31, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

id there any evidence or sources he has British citizenship? I've just had a quick look and he only ever refers to his Irish passport. Given the CTA there would of been a need for him to get British citizenship. 89.100.171.118 (talk) 06:21, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

He's said it in interviews - also found it on https://ireland-calling.com/citizenship/jimmy-carr-irish-citizenship/ SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 15:50, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Tour dates

I find this site really tricky to edit - can someone else edit the Terribly Funny 2.0 date to end in 2024 please? He's adding new dates all the time but the USA is already showing as up to April 2024. Thx

https://www.jimmycarr.com/live-tour/usa/

SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:03, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

We have to be careful not to turn this article into a tour promo outlet... Martinevans123 (talk) 17:27, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

It is a tour promo or is it just correcting inaccurate information? The page initially said that the tour ends in 2023 and it ends in 2024 (I've managed to alter it since). I didn't put the dates on there originally so my assumption was that, if it's something that you (you, meaning the site) want to display, then it should be accurate?? Happy to be corrected - but logging off for the evening. TTFN. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 17:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes, it's something that we (meaning you, me and other editors) might want to display. If the tour hasn't ended, then yes, the article shouldn't say it has. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:45, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

That's a relief! SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 10:19, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Informal tone, style problems, original research

I rolled back a bunch of changes by SecretSquirrel9 who introduced many problems to the biography, especially regarding the podcasts. It looks like we are trying to dig up a history of his radio appearances and podcasts taken from the items themselves rather than WP:SECONDARY sources analysing his career. The self-published website rickygervais.tumblr.com cannot be considered authoritative. Interviews with Carr are not analysis of his career.

What record did Carr supposedly break in performing 17+ times at Birmingham Symphony Hall? How is it that petermcgraw.org is able to give Carr the honorific of "hardest working man in comedy"? Carr's own website should not be used to describe a career arc.

Style problems include using numerals for single-digit numbers rather than writing out the number. Binksternet (talk) 13:27, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Regrettably I think that is fully justified. It seems that User:SecretSquirrel9 is a new user who may be unaware of Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. But they are obviously very interested in Carr and are enthusiastic in trying to improve this article. I hope they can adjust/moderate their approach and will call upon fellow editors for help. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:36, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Few questions...

With the Podcast area someone put a list of half a dozen on, in no order, and I'd just tidied them up and put the biggest ones on from the last 12 months (no where close to how many he did). Not sure why that is wrong as Podcasts now are the TV shows of our day? Joe Rogan gets MILLIONS more views than any other show on TV.

Interviews with Carr were being used by earlier citations that were broken - albeit they were sometimes being reported by newspapers. I've just looked up more recent ones on Podcasts, to make them authoritative (where it is comments about him personally).

Ok on the Gervais one - I've got other sources I could use. Don't recall using Carr's own website - although previous editors had and the link was broken as the site had had a major overhaul recently.

Style problems - I copied whatever was already in use for each section (?). I didn't like some of them myself...

Let me know and I'll have a look later. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 13:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello again

It looks like you have virtually rolled everything back though and actually put things back which are not true, re-ordered text that i had just made chronological and removed Awards that were correctly cited. Bit confused by some of the rejections and, without knowing the reason for each one, am likely to make the same mistakes again.

Re @Martinevans123 (saying call on fellow editors) - not sure how that can work when i have a lot to correct? Volunteering?

I'd looked at lots of pages, belonging to other comedians, and analysed what information had been accepted on theirs and some of the things that have just been rolled back I've seen elsewhere (and not recent edits).

Just when i thought i was making progress :o))

T SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 13:54, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Maybe just slow down a bit and wait for others to agree? But beware of being branded as a WP:SPA. And other comedian's pages may also be wrong.... and just overlooked. As Binksternet has pointed out, reliable secondary sources are probably the key to progress here. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:58, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Hmmmm - I won't be a WP:SPA (eventually) but have just had a few days to myself (I'm self employed and it's quiet time), it's been cold and wet and i was getting to grips with the interface. I was only doing a few edits a day and waiting to see if stuff got rolled back - but wasn't sure how long was long enough? I've got a note of all my edits (and more than one source for much of it) but need some guidance on what i can put back, because I am mystified as to why so much was removed. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 14:10, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes, "how long is long enough" is a bit indeterminate. You've always got the Talk page here if you're unsure on whether or how to add something. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Sorry - feeling a bit whiney today (dental work this morning) so this was just the icing on the cake! The cake i would struggle to eat right now... I was making edits to take my mind off my teeth.

I did ask someone re how to do the bullet points but everything else I figured out ok (except tone of voice, it would appear). I've been in IT for years and work in SEO.

The other thing I just thought of was how quickly would you decide i was a WP:SPA? I've got years worth of info/knowledge on comedy (especially Carr) and music / certain IT topics - but my work ebbs and flows. I'm starting a new contract at the weekend and there are only so many hours a day i can sit down, without seizing up. So would possibly be less likely to do edits on here.

If you are saying "slow down" and I can see a lot wrong with that page - i could be stuck on it for weeks. Especially as I spent probably 3 times as long offline, checking out sources.

I did think when i first started making edits that i wished there was a positive step - as in someone approving. So that you know you can move on to another update. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 15:03, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

See WP:THERAPY, even for root canal alas, but that can happen to all of us, I guess. People may be watching, people may not. So it's always best to ask explicitly first. Again, there's no hard and fast rule on WP:SPA: those editors are usually also edit warriors, which you appear not to be. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:12, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Crikey. That's one terrifying page... I'm not sure a couple of hours of distraction is therapy though...it was just more constructive than watching comedy videos. Have you got a page for "what to do when your expensive dental insurance doesn't cover an £800 root canal"?

I've just read the page about not biting newcomers - specifically un-deletion or arbitration on points. Would I have to raise each point as a discussion on here?

For example - the 2nd para of "personal life" says he has spoken of depression and this is not true and the citation quoted only uses the words "mental health". He has discussed this a lot and specifically says that Depression is a medical issue that is treated with pharmaceuticals and that he was just sad. Basically he's said many times that people conflate Sadness with Depression and shouldn't. So that para is completely the wrong way around.

Should I re-edit it or put a discussion on here, please? Or i could just go and stick my head in the oven. Either works for me right now. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 15:23, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

I'd raise an example question here. It saves on gas. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:28, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Quoting WP:THERAPY at a newbie seems a bit OTT, Martin! SecretSquirrel is right - WP:NOBITING! SecretSquirrel - some of the advice above is good. Reliable secondary sourcing is the key thing. So, for example, absolutely re-write the paragraph on depression/mental health, sourcing it to where somebody writes about what Carr has said on the subject. And welcome to Wikipedia! Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Oh ok. Sorry if SecretSquirrel feels bitten by me. I'll leave it to you folks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you!

Actually it wasn't Martin i meant - it was having 4 days of edits dumped when I'm sure they can't ALL have been bad. I'm just trying to figure out how to get the stuff out of this page that is wrong and bring it up to date.

I've just added a reply to someone else's discussion on here re YouTube as a source. Carr (and most other of the biggest comedians) rarely gives "written" interviews any more as he's flying around the world with an insane schedule (you only have to watch his feed on X to see).

I am 100% i won't find that in writing so my only other option would be to remove that line completely as whoever put it there has misinterpreted what the original article said (it only mentioned mental health, not depression).

Maybe i should start a blog as "Bonkers Bunny" and then source myself ((joking)) SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 15:46, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Me and Binkster are bezzy mates really. A bit like Starsky & Hutch, I've always thought... Martinevans123 (talk) 15:52, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

So you're ganing up on me, is that it?

I need emojis on here...so you can tell when I'm joking SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:02, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

ganGing SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:02, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Likewise. That was the last thing I was attempting. Please mentally attach to most of my comments above, but especially the last one. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:07, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm a woman on the edge today...beware! I'm raising questions all over the place. Going to regret this, methinks SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:11, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Thx - done! SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 15:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

The quickest fix is to mention Carr's works factually in chron order and not apply a dramatic arc. Binksternet (talk) 16:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm a dramatic person though... (kidding). I think the problem for me is I can't see what on earth was wrong with some of the infor - see the questions that I've just raised here.

I was trying hard to not nuke text that other people had previously added - but it's tricky when it's kind of off enough to need a full rewrite. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:29, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Can't use youtube as a source?

Hi, I had a question about an edit I made which was reverted (@Ghmyrtle) because it used YouTube as a source.

I understand if it was a video summarising an academic study, for example. But this is a direct recording of what Carr said, it's unclear to me why a video of someone speaking is not reliable account of their thoughts (assuming reliability is the issue)?

I'm fairly new to editing and I'm not disputing this - I'm sure I was in the wrong - just looking for clarity for future reference.

Thank you JM1215 (talk) 15:30, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

I've got the same question. Artists are far more likely to be interviewed in a podcast than a newspaper.

For example - when Carr travelled to Australia he had 7 hours flight some days, moving to the next city. Artists in this instance find it easier to jump on podcasts (sometimes from hotel rooms) than to have to be at a radio station for a specific time.

But I'm not sure why it makes the information any less valid? SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 15:38, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

It's quite possibly true that Wikipedia policy on the use of sources like podcasts and YT videos needs some updating. But, policies and guidelines are agreed on a site-wide basis, and the best place to discuss any issues may well be here - rather than on this page. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you - I've raised a discussion (not sure how to link it here)

Newbie2 SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Personal life - removing inaccurate information/depression

I've had a bunch of edits rolled back and need some guidance, please.

For example - the 2nd para of "personal life" says he has spoken of depression and this is not true and the citation quoted only uses the words "mental health". He has discussed this a lot (in podcasts) and specifically says that Depression is a medical issue that is treated with pharmaceuticals and that he was just sad. Basically he's said many times that people conflate Sadness with Depression and shouldn't. So that para is completely the wrong way around. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 15:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Here's a source saying he had 'bouts of depression': https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/74912824/jimmy-carr-talks-religion-war-and-ribald-jokes-before-his-nz-tour

He talks more about his mental health here and here and here. The previous sentence, which read: "Carr has spoken of the depression he experienced in his 20s, while working in marketing, and credits his decision to pursue a comedy career in helping him to cope with depression", was removed here Martinevans123 (talk) 21:19, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, good morning. The thing i was trying to be more clear about is, more recently (past couple of years) he's talked about the epidemic of male suicide and depression (and supported charities) and tried to be clearer about the distinction between sadness (which is how he felt when he left his job) and depression. Also, the original citation used only said "mental health" - so, at the very least, a diff citation was needed (preferably a more recent one).

BTW - That first link (religion, war and ribald jokes) has no mention of "bouts of depression" in it? I may not be awake yet - but have read it 3 times. :o))

Podcast chats are where he's been clearest and although he's been a teeny bit fast and loose with the terms at times (saying he can white knuckle through it) he mostly is very clear that depression is a long term disease that requires medication - and he takes nothing for it. Even after the tax thing (when he thought he'd lost everything) - his Dr gave him meds and he never took them.

His Diary of a CEO pod may be a good one as it's in chapters and has one on mental health (should only take you 5 mins to listen). I'm always happier to listening to someone explain themselves, rather than the interpretation of a journo. I think when you stagger off a long-haul flight and into an interview even the best of us may fluff a line or two.

I suppose where I'm coming from, too, is that I had a depressed parent (lifelong meds) and I also like to keep my language "clean" about the difference between the real "black dog" - and the ups and downs of coping with deaths and the problems of life. My situation probably means I honed in on those mentions more.

Does that make sense? Comedy Nerd77 (talk) 06:24, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

I was just offering some sources, thanks. Janet Street-Porter, in that 2017 The Independent piece, agrees with him that "Not everyone who claims to be suffering from depression actually is – some of us are just sad", despite his annoying comments BBC Radio 4's Desert Island Discs. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:37, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

The problem i often see is I listen to a podcast (all kinds of people) and it gets into the news, for some reason, and a teeny, subtle change of a word completely changes the context. Usually to make it more clickbait-y.

And every time there is a joke controversy (usually Carr or Gervais or Chappelle) the press declare "fans were outraged" - when usually it's 3 people on X who don't like comedy and weren't at the show anyway. Comedy Nerd77 (talk) 15:01, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Podcast issues aside, do you think something needs to be added about Carr's mental health/ depression/ feelings of sadness? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:32, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

If you think it's a good idea I could cobble something together. Might be worth waiting a couple of weeks as Triggernometry said last week that they had recorded a new pod (and it's not been released yet) and another podcaster tweeted how excited he was to be "going down to London" for a record. I'm guessing that they will poss come out when the new Netflix Special drops. Or the 2 he's already done on Neal Brennan's Blocks were very interesting, talking about insecurity about looks/weight and their childhoods. Neal has had real depression and tried all kinds of meds. Comedy Nerd77 (talk) 09:11, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

By all means go ahead, although I think there may already be enough material in sources other than his podcasts. Not sure how Neal Brennan fits in. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:19, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Sorry - missed this - bit busy with work. NB is a good friend of JC and has been on meds for 20+ years. There is a scary clip of him having ECT treatment. He's now (finally) getting relief from ayahuasca, apparently. I just thought that might be a good one to use as they get the topic in some depth (will have to re-watch it sometime). Comedy Nerd77 (talk) 08:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

... "a scary clip of him having ECT treatment"? Really? Martinevans123 (talk) 08:57, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Yeah - it's in one of the Blocks podcasts he did with JC. You know someone has bad depression when they are desperate enough to try that. Comedy Nerd77 (talk) 09:04, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

That sounds quite significant. This must have been mentioned by WP:RS elsewhere? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:10, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Sorry - i'm coming out of a migraine and not making much sense. Was I clear that I meant that it was Neal who had ECT? I'm so dopey i almost typed ECG earlier...should probably step away from the keyboard. Comedy Nerd77 (talk) 09:24, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

No worries. Best discussed at Neal Brennan, I guess. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:26, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

I've given it a go - what do you think? I started the citation link from the point where he started to discuss ayahuasca. As his Blocks podcast was not mentioned (it's a year old) I added that section first. Comedy Nerd77 (talk) 14:13, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

He's not really on my watchlist, sorry. But will try and have a look. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Magik - how can I disprove?

Under Filmography it says "2016 - Magik - Jacob (voice)". I've removed this once and had it undone - but how can i prove that he was NOT in this film? Wherever this information originally came from it has spread like bindweed around the web and I've already removed it from several places - after emailing his Management company (info account) and having it confirmed. Can I take it back off again? SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:09, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Basically, all content needs to be verifiable if challenged, and can be removed if there is no citation/reference. So yes, this can be removed. What we can't do is use something his management company replies with - that would be original research. Bear in mind, if there is a reliable source to back something up, it can stay - even if it's wrong! But iMDB - like any user-generated content site - is not a reliable source. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 17:09, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

I removed it once and the little devil bounced back again!! It's basically on "user contributed databases" all over the place (and I think it is on a South African Wiki too). It just WILL not die.

Re the management company statement - I just said "i can find no concrete evidence that he was in that film, or that it's even been released. Was he?" and I got back a "NOPE" (paraphrasing). I just couldn't find where it had come from - but, whoever started it, it took on a life of its own. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 17:15, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Podcast links

This page has a Podcasts section with a handful of shows linked. I replaced that text with a table with 12 podcasts on from UK/USA and Aus, which has been rejected.

What is acceptable for something like this, please? Several of the ones I'd added have MILLIONS of listenets (one being Joe Rogan) and, to some extent, podcasts are more important than some TV appearances.

Most of the ones I added were from the past 12 months - one of the older ones was Diary of a CEO which has had 1.6m views on YouTube and has also been shown on the BBC. Those kinds of numbers are a big deal for any artist - so does anyone have opinions on what is acceptable? SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:18, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is probably waiting for a peer-reviewed 10-year meta-study in the International Journal of Podcast Studies before anything like that could be considered. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:24, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Huge market. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes, published by anorak-cellarnurds.uk. Well worth the $299 annual subscription. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:34, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Comedy Specials

There is a table (under Comedy Specials) which i added a Role column to (as each one varies re roles of Writer, Exec Producer, Associate producer etc.). This has been removed and I'm not sure why?

I also added "Bill Burr Presents Friends Who Kill" (Netflix Special) and this is apparently also not acceptable.

Help! SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Filmography

I added the 2 items below to the Filmography table and they were both removed. Can anyone tell me why, please?

- 1999 The Colour Of Funny - Writer

- 2024 Fackham Hall - Writer, Executive Producer

(I think I cited Chortle for the latter - but this one would also work https://www.comedy.co.uk/film/fackham-hall/) SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Radio

I added the text below to the radio section and it was rejected. Can anyone tell me why, please?

Carr has appeared on BBC Radio 4's Museum of Curiosity a total of 7 times, since 2011. He was the Museum Curator (in his 5 appearances in 2012) and a guest on the 2018 Annual Stock Take Christmas special, alongside Lee Mack, Jo Brand and Sally Philips. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:26, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Did you have any sources for all those claims? BBC episodes are usually easy to source. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes. I might have used https://www.comedy.co.uk/radio/museum_curiosity/episodes/ because it's all gathered in one place. On the BBC site there are 72 episodes and so referencing ONE person amongst them is tricky https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00k3wvk/episodes/player SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

His list might be better? Martinevans123 (talk) 16:43, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't know. Don't mind either way. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:50, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

have added and linked to BCG as suggested SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:01, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Stand up comedy / Charity

I had moved the first para down to the end (it's not currently chronological) and also moved one item down to "controversies". I was trying to prep to add more "important" milestones in such as supporting Dave Chappelle at the Hollywood Bowl and last week's gigs in India (something very few Western acts have done).

Those "re-orders" have been returned - any ideas why?

Also I was going to add a Charity section as there are a lot of events not mentioned and I thought it would look tidier - Princes Trust, Comic Relief, Queens Jubilee, Stand Up For Heroes (USA), Secret Policeman's Ball. Are Charity sections ok? All of these events he has performed at more than once - so it's not just a paragraph worth (have citations for all) SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Awards

I lengthened the Awards list, as below, and they were bounced. Not sure why?

The only ones i was not able to add citations for were the ones for Nuts magazine, because it went bust and the archive pages wouldn't link.

·        Perrier Award Nomination (2002)

·        Time Out Award: Best Stand Up (2003)

·        Royal Television Society Award: Best On-Screen Newcomer (2003)

·        LAFTA Award: Best Stand Up (2004)

·        Rose D'Or Nomination: Best Presenter, Distraction (2004)

·        LAFTA Award: Funniest Man (2005)

·         Rose D'Or Nomination: Best Presenter, Distraction (2004)

·        LAFTA Award: Best Stand Up (2006)

·        British Comedy Award: Best Live Stand Up (2006)

·        LAFTA Award: Funniest Man (2007)

·        LAFTA Award: Best Stand Up (2008)

·        Nuts Awards: Best Stand Up (2010)

·        LAFTA Award: Loaded Legend (2011)

·        Zoo Awards: Funniest Man (2011)

·        The LAFTAs: Funniest DVD for "Being Funny" (2012)

·        Nuts Awards: Funniest Comic (2014) SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:52, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

If the only evidence that someone won an award is the website of the organisation that bestowed it, that's a good indication that it's not sufficiently notable for inclusion. Only list significant awards that get reported by independent secondary media (and probably only ones that we have an article about, which is a good indication that the award itself is notable. Girth Summit _(blether) 09:36, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

The only UK sites that tend to report this type of thing tend to be Comedy.co.uk (British Comedy Guide) and Chortle and I think my links were mostly to one or the other.

Where I am struggling is where my citations seem to have been held to higher standards than others on the page. If you have a moment - if you look at the top Award on the page now (Time Out 2002 - which has been there for years, from what i can tell) the citation is pretty much nonsensical. I think this link would be better https://www.chortle.co.uk/comics/j/261/jimmy_carr/news - it's not perfect - but a 22 year old comedy story is mainly only on old pages like http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/3601272.stm or pages for after dinner speaker promos / his management's website.

Should I change that one to Chortle? Do you view Chortle or the BCG as credible sources? Hoping so as they are all I've got.

In this example link the BCG has more awards listed - but, ironically, not that one https://www.comedy.co.uk/people/jimmy_carr/ SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 09:55, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

It's not that you're being held to a higher standard, it's more like someone noticed what you were doing. Lots of our articles have dodgy sources (hell, someone of them have downright vandalism in them) simply because it's the encyclopaedia that anyone can edit - someone comes along, adds a dubious assertion supported by a ropey source, nobody notices, and it sits there for years. You have come along and made lots of significant changes, however, and you've asked about it on a well-attended help page, so people have noticed what you are doing, and are vetting your changes, that's all.

Now, as for the awards/sourcing, as I said if stuff isn't picked up in mainstream media, it probably isn't worth mentioning. A long list of awards that someone has won isn't, in my view, of any particular interest to the reader - it's the sort of puff that someone might put on their own CV or on their website, but I don't think our readership cares whether or not Carr won some award from 'Nuts' magazine. I'd probably just strip the awards back to the ones that we actually have articles about, those should be easy enough to source (and yes, that 22-year old BBC page would be fine). Girth Summit _(blether) 11:08, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

As a newbie it's a bit overwhelming how many help pages there are and so I also looked around the page(s) of a lot of other comedians for inspiration.

I am fine with guidance, honest....but so far (until i kicked off these specific questions) I'd only had a mass reject. Even though I'd done as suggested to me and made individual, small edits that could stand on their own.

Just for clarity though - I am an absolute stickler for accuracy - just not quite figured out how to apply it here yet.

I'll have a look at the awards list later. Walk time. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 11:40, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Awards, text

Re the below (which was rejected) - the 1st line I just reworded slightly (the poll name was slightly wrong) and moved down the page (from stand up) and the 2nd one I added new. Any thoughts, please?

In 2003, he was listed in the Observer as one of the 50 funniest acts in British comedy. In 2007, a poll on the Channel 4 website for 100 Funniest Stand-Ups of All Time, Jimmy Carr was 12th.

In 2022 TicketSource.co.uk looked at comedians, from both sides of the pond, to try and decide who was the most influential. They ranked them for estimated net worth, number of TV specials, Twitter (X) and Instagram followers, the cheapest ticket for their shows, number of Google searches and the average number of YouTube views their content gets. In the UK Jimmy Carr ranked number 1, just above Ricky Gervais (2^nd) and Jack Whitehall (3^rd).

Citation - https://www.ticketsource.co.uk/blog/the-worlds-most-influential-comedians SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 16:56, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

First of all, we should not be using informal phrases like 'the pond' - this is an encyclopaedia, are articles should be written in formal standard English. As for whether the stuff about ticketsource should be included, ask yourself whether the source is reliable. It is on ticketsource's blog. It has no byline. There is no indication that there was any editorial control, independent oversight or fact checking. Ticketsource is a commercial organisation that sells tickets for events; it is not any kind of authority about who is and is not 'influential'. YMMV, but that source looks to me like a bit of clickbait that was thrown together on the back of an envelope by an office intern who knows how to use Google, and should not be used to support any assertion in any article about any subject. Girth Summit _(blether) 09:46, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

That is fine - that is the kind of direct feedback I'm looking for. I've written web copy (work and personal) for years and years but different industries /platforms have different language and I'm trying to settle mine. Thank you.

Re Ticketsource as a story (playing Devil's Advocate) - the Sunday Times Rich List is on Wikipedia and this is the comedy version of that (it caused a kerfuffle among comedians who are sensitive bunch at times and highly competitive). From a comedy perspective I'm not sure it's any less valid than the awards voted for by the public. For every poll that votes 1 comic as their favourite - another one will hate them.

Personally I don't think Rich Lists should be validated in the press or anywhere else as they are also clickbait and guesswork. I know people who know people and many of the figures are way, WAY out - and yet that list has a page all of its own.

PS - had to look up YMMV. And kinda wish there were emojis on these discussion boards so I could show that I'm not having a rant here. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 10:08, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

I'd say Sunday Times Rich List has far more traction/ general respect than does a ticketSource.co.uk blog. That's why it has a whole series of long-standing Wikipedia articles. You might have to spend more time explaining how the comedy result was calculated than there is value in giving the "result". It's much easier to count dollars than it is to count comedy? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:28, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, this is nothing like the Sunday Times Rich List, except in the sense that they are both lists. One of them is written by a widely respected news organisation with a reputation for fact-checking, while the other is written by god-knows-whom for the blog section of a ticket vendor's website; they are not comparable. It would only be worth mentioning if independent secondary sources picked up on the story, for example if the BBC or the Guardian ran an article about the Ticketsource list - that would be an indicator that people other than ticketsource took their poll seriously. Girth Summit _(blether) 10:59, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, we do need emojis! I mean, I nearly completely missed the sarcasm in Girth Summit's comment at first glance! "a widely respected news organisation with a reputation for fact-checking", for an organ of Rupert Murdoch! Nicely played, GS, nicely played! Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:09, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Well, I didn't say the reputation was deserved... Seriously though, The Times and the Sunday Times are, according to WP:RSP, considered 'generally reliable', and have been discussed often enough to warrant their own shortcut: WP:THETIMES. I don't believe that ticketsource enjoys the same level of standing here. Girth Summit _(blether) 11:23, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps it does have more traction (and my tongue was firmly in my cheek) - but I still think it's a load of old... SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 11:24, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

I was glad I wasn't drinking at the time or it would have been a keyboard needing a deep clean. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 11:27, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

BBC or Guardian....those bastions of truth and accuracy! (i need emojis....).

I think that Ticketsource thing has a value in, some ways, of showing how our culture changes. The comedians on there understand how to use Social Media (and Netflix) and are trailblazing how to build a huge career. There are marketing businesses that study Kevin Hart's methods, for example. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 11:26, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

As Girth Summit says, we are stuck with Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. If your political scruples don't allow you countenance such sources, WP may not be the place for you, alas. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:30, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Not sure how you got there, Martin. I didn't mention politics and was merely carrying on the joke from User:Bastun . Perhaps it's not the place for him either???

My slant is very much that the Guardian LOVES Stewart Lee and very few other comedians. Some of the comedy articles on there have been shockingly bad. But from the perspective of FACTS, not politics.

But my main problem with using those papers for sources is that they are behind paywalls.

Which I suppose is another question - where there is a choice, is it better to choose sources that are open? SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 11:48, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

The main consideration should always be is the source reliable. Assuming it is, then it's somewhat better to have a source that isn't behind a paywall, but that's very much a secondary consideration. Sources don't even have to be online; books, old (pre-internet) magazines, etc., are all still very much reliable sources. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:10, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm a stickler for facts and accuracy so I would always hesitate to use a source that I haven't been able to read and so many of our papers are behind paywalls now. It's not like you can trust the clickbait-ified links either.

I am making a note of all the advice you are giving me, btw. But it's month end and i really should get my head back into a spreadsheet! :o)) SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 13:28, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

e/c How did I get there, Secret? Possibly because, yes, you need emojis. (They are available if you search...) I always try to use accessible free sources, but officially WP seems to have no preference - we even still use those archaic sources called ye olde printed book. But by all means, go ahead and root out any Grauniad mis-truths over at Stewart Lee. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:12, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Are they? Will have to look - but supposed to be doing some admin.

I think to bore on about the original topic (because i thought about it on a walk) - I don't "like" the Rich List because they look at income and then pretty much make a guess (I know it's a bit more involved than that). But with comedians / singers etc., they look at how many gigs they have done and what the ticket prices are and work out what they think the person has earned. But they cannot know for certain what they are worth as they don't know how much they have spent / lost in bad investments / given away etc. And I doubt anyone corrects them.

So they pretty much do the same thing as TicketSource. Data mine publicly available information and publish an opinion, dressed up as facts. IMHO. :o) SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 13:34, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Tours

Another rejected edit of mine...I added a column to the Tours table to indicate which DVD / Netflix special applied to each one. What i was hoping to then do (but never got chance) was take that "noise" from the Stand up section.

So, instead of having things like "Carr's sixth Live DVD, Jimmy Carr: Making People Laugh, was released on 8 November 2010" - I had just added "Making People Laugh" on the row for "Rapier Wit" as I thought this would make the page tidier...especially as I have some more tour related text I would like to add in.

It does partially repeat the Titles in "Comedy specials" but I didn't want to make 1 massively wide table (by combining the 2) as I'm sure it will look horrible on a mobile device.

And currently what is in the tables - is repeated up in the text.

Thoughts? SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 17:03, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Television

I have also had bounced a table row for "2005-2006 Distraction - Presenter - Comedy Central (USA)" - linked to Comedy Central. I felt this warranted it's own row because, although the same show format, it was a whole new production crew/company and had moved from the UK to USA.

And another row that was removed "2024 Battle In The Box - Host - Dave" https://www.comedy.co.uk/tv/battle-in-the-box/ which I think has already been filmed but just not scheduled yet.

ANy idea why this vanished, please? SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 17:07, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Edinburgh

I’ve just added a new section (under Stand-up comedy) for Edinburgh – to summarise Carr’s appearances at the annual Festival. Really, really hoping that this passes muster and doesn’t get nuked – can anyone see any tweaks that are necessary, please?

I extracted this info from some broader research, on comedy festivals, that I’ve been doing for someone else’s project and have tried to convey how important this festival was to his career. And the room/venue sizes are mentioned to try and demonstrate how he moved up a gear each time he returned. Ditto the mention of TV shows – indicating audience growth.

And the 2007 mention of The Guardian attitude change was indicative of a wider backlash against big names. Some think only people like Sadowitz should be promoted – others acknowledge that a “name” at the EICC draws punters in, which is better for everyone. I suspect this debate played a part in 2014 being his last attendance, but couldn’t find a specific reference to it.

I know that, in the early years, many of our (now) big-name comedians drove up there together and have talked about the bonding process of chatting in the car / dossing down in each other’s rented flats, running around seeing shows and then eating takeaways. I just can’t find the interviews right now – but may add to the relevant people’s pages when I do (if it adds value). I’ve got a LOT of information.

I just called it “Edinburgh”, btw, because the TV festival is also mentioned in there.

Question about the 3^rd paragraph in the current Stand-up section – should I eventually move that down to a chronological spot within “Edinburgh”? I moved a paragraph once previously and the change was rejected.

Paragraph 5 – the final line is a repeat of my Edinburgh info (if it gets passed). Should it stay?

And also the 7^th paragraph says that Rapier Wit “….tour opened on 20 August 2009 with nine shows at the Edinburgh Festival”. That citation 46 (which will probably renumber when I add my stuff)

1.     "Tour Dates". Ents24.com. Archived from the original on 4 January 2011. Retrieved 10 March 2011.

is now dead and the official Edinburgh programme said it was 8 shows. Shall I wait to see what you peeps say before altering/removing that?

Nervously waiting for approval…worse than being at school! SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 11:58, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

America

Trying to use search engines for research is very difficult lately as the algorithms push you towards what they THINK you are looking for, regardless of how many search operators etc. you use. Which means, while researching the Edinburgh information I had to use really broad search terms, only restricted by date filters.

Although an annoyance – it meant that I’ve collected a LOT of information on other un-related people, gigs and events. Much of which will probably now have to wait until the Winter for me to sort through (chores to do and all that).

Despite making so many trips Stateside (virtually once or twice a year) there are very few press reports. UK MSM are not interested (unless it’s a “cancel x person for a joke” story) and BCG / Chortle appear to be pretty much run on a shoe string and so rely on being fed stories. We don’t celebrate our UK comedy scene enough!!

The LA Comedy Store, for example, is legendary (to comedians and comedy fans) as the place that developed everyone from Richard Pryor to Robin Williams to Jim Carrey. As an Alumnus of the club (a rare honour, to be bestowed upon a Brit) Carr can turn up any time he’s in town and just perform. But finding an official record is tricky – so I’ve had to leave it a bit vague and have left many appearances out (not sure the Wikipedia guidelines would accept single tweets from punters).

Where I’ve felt it’s important to note an appearance I’ve used, for example, the X account of the official Comedy Store, so that it’s not just some random user who might have their account removed. Is that acceptable?

Although I would imagine some would think that listing too many TV shows is trying to turn this into IMDB – my perspective is that the American late-night shows give massive exposure and a Brit artist getting repeated invites to these shows is a huge career boost. There are many, many more shows he has appeared on – these are just the biggies.

I’ve highlighted Netflix a fair bit as he seems to be well regarded and “plays nicely” with other comedians – hence his collaborations. Again – there are many more that I couldn’t find citations for, where has worked with / supported other US stars.

The one thing that I think someone may “object” to is the section main title “America” then covering TV and stand up, which doesn’t fit the format of the paragraphs above.

A lot of work has gone into this so, if anyone is unhappy, can we please talk about it, rather than just nuke the lot…always nervous about doing a big update. And it’s heartbreaking when something gets removed without warning. Comedy Nerd77 (talk) 13:17, 17 April 2024 (UTC)