Talk:The Wall (British game show)

Television: British / Game shows Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the British television task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Television game shows task force (assessed as Low-importance).

BBC Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.BBCWikipedia:WikiProject BBCTemplate:WikiProject BBCBBC articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks for WikiProject BBC:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Improve BBC, BBC News (TV channel) and BBC News to Good Article status following previous reviews, create BBC Computer Literacy Project (in light of forthcoming 30th anniversary)
Cleanup : Chucklevision - references and general clean-up, Pebble Mill Studios - over-detailed and long, BBC World Service Television - unreferenced and confusing
Copyedit : BBC News, Broadcasting House
Expand : Top 20 start-class BBC articles with most importance: BBC Japan, BBC World Service Television, BBC Lifestyle, BBC Two Northern Ireland
NPOV : Criticism of the BBC (See comments)
Stubs : Stub-Class BBC articles
Other : *Restructure the category
- Add infoboxes to the BBC articles without infoboxes
- Add free-use images to biographical articles where possible
- Add references to Goa Mix (see assessment) and Coat of arms of the BBC
- Return Dad's Army to a Good article. (See comments)
- Reassess BBC following improvements to article.

Results table[edit]

On the Wikipedia pages for at least the Polish and American versions of this show, a results table is included showing the outcomes of the already broadcast episodes. A similar table for this page was created but it has been partly removed for apparently breaking a guideline about not using Wikipedia for excessive stats. If there is no problem with this on other versions,why on the British version? ThisIsNotAShill (talk) 17:31, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see this has been fixed, thank you! ThisIsNotAShill (talk) 12:20, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It keeps getting removed by the same person. It's getting annoying now. 79.70.193.8 (talk) 13:11, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dougal18[edit]

I am getting so annoyed by someone called Dougal18 who keeps removing the result table of the British version of The Wall. This I think is what I call persistent vandalism and that person should not interfere in the workings of this page. 79.70.193.8 (talk) 21:23, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Contestant results table[edit]

@Dougal18, Segavisions1991, Luc812208, and ThisIsNotAShill: First off apologies for not replying to the talk messages here already. I honestly didn't see them. The only contact I've had was on my talk page from someone who has never edited the article - yep, it puzzled me too. Regarding results tables in the article, they should not be in the article because they break several Wikipedia policies and guidelines. This information would be much better off on a wiki site like Fandom, on Wikipedia the information breaks the following:

WP:V there are no references in the information.
WP:INDISCRIMINATE "data should be put in context with explanations referenced to independent sources." the information has no context or referenced explanations.
Even WP:DUE applies; The detailed information is only of interest to fans of the show, most readers won't be interested in the specific outcome of each stage of each episode, Wikipedia articles should give a general understanding and not be written specifically for experts on the subject.

As I said above, this information would be better off on Fandom, it would give much more flexibility than having to work within the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia. - X201 (talk) 20:20, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I commented at WT:TV but agree in principle that as these are typically non-notable people, listing out the results of each show is unnecessary. We'd not do that for shows like Jeopardy or Wheel of Fortune. If there is a case that some win is unusual, as documented by sources, that can be discussed in the context of the show. --Masem (t) 23:22, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, episode-by-episode breakdowns are too much detail for Wikipedia (I recommend Fandom too). — Bilorv (talk) 00:36, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with everything OP says. I might make an exception for celebrity contestants, but only (1) if they have an existing WP article, (2) their participation is properly sourced in this article (nb IMDb does not count), and (3) as a brief paragraph not a detailed table. Narky Blert (talk) 18:24, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I had thought about special exemptions when I wrote the above and think they are valid. The bulk of contestants, e.g. Steve and Mary from Stafford, are not notable, celebrities under certain properly sourced conditions may be. I also had in mind a recent edition of The Wheel where no one won the prize pot. This was solely down to the show having no protocol for the exceptional circumstance of all three contestants getting the final question wrong. It was covered in reliable sources, so is a valid mention in the programme article, but as you say, doesn't warrant a results table. - X201 (talk) 07:29, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That seems fair enough, thanks for the feedback. ThisIsNotAShill (talk) 11:03, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@El C: A request for some advice. Where do I go from here? In the discussion above and the discussion at Wikiproject Television both come down on the side of not having results tables for individual shows in the article. I've notified the user of this discussion and they have not engaged and keep restoring the unwanted content. What is the best next step? page protection? a larger RFC? get a third party to engage the user regarding this and the other articles they're adding this content to? Any advice would be appreciated. - X201 (talk) 07:34, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've partially blocked ButtersWorld (User_talk:ButtersWorld#Partial_block) from the main article. Yes, semiprotection is an option. WP:ECP is also an option if that doesn't work out. In general, any further edit warring over the contested change that involves a failure to engage here (certainly, after a notice informing them of this discussion) will be seen purely disruptive, and as such, a cause for sanctions (user or page-level, whatever the situation calls for). El_C 10:11, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@El C: Sorry to keep dragging you back here, but the content is still being re-added and no engagement in discussion, this time by a different user, Luc812208. - X201 (talk) 07:06, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]