Talk:Here's Lucy

Syndication and Rights issues

Is anyone sure about Viacom ever distributing "The Lucy Show" before 1994? I came across a trade ad from a 1973 issue of Broadcasting magazine and it showed a ad for "Mission: Impossible" and "The Lucy Show" and both were distributed by Paramount Television Sales (this was before the 1994 merger between Paramount and Viacom, of course.) Terehend72 (talk) 04:12, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Hereslucylogo.jpg

Image:Hereslucylogo.jpg is being used in 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:TVGuideLUCYLIZDICK.jpg

Image:TVGuideLUCYLIZDICK.jpg is being used in 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 02:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Harrison Carter?

I was looking for another Harrison Carter, but I was redirected here. Amazing to see that this article NEVER cites Harrison Carter... --Fioravante Patrone (talk) 22:41, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Unsourced Material

Moved info here from an article for being unsourced long-term. Please feel free to source and reincorporate into an article. Freshh (talk) 16:16, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Syndication and rights issues

==Syndication and rights issues== Here's Lucy was not offered in syndication when the series ended in 1974 because of the other two Lucy series hit and it was felt that this show might undermine the success of the other two shows or the fact those shows were so successful that this show would not fare as well. This show was also owned by Telepictures, while I Love Lucy was owned by Viacom (successor at that time to CBS Enterprises or CBS Films), and The Lucy Show was owned at that time by Paramount (successor to Desilu), so there would be competitive situations as well. Since that time, Viacom and Paramount merged in the 1990s, and CBS (which spun-off Viacom circa 1970) was purchased by the merged Viacom-Paramount entity circa 2000. CBS retained the rights to run the show in daytime. CBS Daytime reran the series weekday mornings from May 2 to November 4, 1977, in the same time-slot that they had previously rerun The Lucy Show from 1968 to 1972, and before that (1959–67) had at various times rerun I Love Lucy. Finally, in the fall of 1981, Here's Lucy was put into broadcast syndication first by Telepictures, and in turn, the rights were later transferred to Warner Bros. Television Distribution (which acquired Telepictures' holdings). Here's Lucy was not all that successful in syndication and not shown much after 1985. Still, the show was also one of the first shows aired on the PAX Network in 1998. Warner Bros. TV retains the distribution rights for all media except home video. The program was shown in Britain by the BBC fairly soon after it was made, in the Saturday tea-time slot, but it has not been shown often since. It has been seen in Australia on the Go! channel since 31 May 2010. For many years prior to that on Australian television, the show was distributed by Pacific Telecasters Pty. Ltd before being later transferred to Warner Bros. Television. It was a perennial favorite seen on the Nine Network and lastly in 1992 on ABC Television. Prior to Go!, the show screened on the Ovation Channel.

Cancellation concerns.

Here's Lucy was undoubtedly popular with audiences during its run, is it true that Lucille Ball herself wished the series to end after season five? Season six was produced without Ball's blessing and ratings dropped significantly. Another often unclear mentioning is the many guest stars. Why were there some many guest stars on this show? Was it to keep ratings up? This should be mentioned (if the information is out there). Was Here's Lucy canceled under the so-called "Rural Purge"? Did CBS want a seventh season? This should be discussed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ClassiCoEditor97 (talk • contribs) 01:36, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

At one time, this article included an acknowledgment that it might have been CBS, rather than Ball, that chose to end the series in 1974. A book about Lucille Ball's various television shows (the name of that book escapes me) claims that CBS canceled the show, but didn't want to embarrass Ball. CBS quietly informed Ball in advance about the decision to cancel the show, so that she could claim it was her idea to end it. This information has been deleted from this article, but the following sentence remains: "It was widely reported at the time that it was Ball's decision not to continue." Why, I wonder, would someone delete the topic, yet leave behind one sentence that raises the issue without then fully addressing it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.139.205.249 (talk) 18:38, 23 May 2015 (UTC)