Talk:Jimmy Carr/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

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)

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)

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)

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)