Talk:The Gong Show/Archive 1

Archive 1

spoof

spoof???

kh7 15:33 Mar 23, 2003 (UTC)

Good catch. Changed to parody. Michael Q. Schmidt (talk) 08:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

original versions

--There were two earlier versions of The Gong Show that did not work out. In its original incarnation, The Gong Show was syndicated and hosted by John Barbour, a journeyman entertainer who went on to be one of the hosts of NBC's "Real People". When the show was brought to NBC, the host was Gary Owens, the broadcaster/Laugh-In performer. For reasons unknown, the network asked producer Chuck Barris to pick up the hosting duties.

I added this information to the article. Sources explained that NBC was unhappy with how the show was too "tame" and how they liked the irreverancy Barris brought to the show. Barbour's 5 episodes were never aired. Michael Q. Schmidt (talk) 08:29, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Acts

Perhaps the most infamous act ever to appear on The Gong Show was called "Can You Spare a Nickle?", in which two teenage girls ate popsicles in a suggestive manner. It was cut from the West Coast feed due to the number of complaints.

Actually, unsigned user, it was called, "Have you got a Nickel", and it's been re-added (after hiatus) with new sources. ShawnIsHere: Now in colors 10:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

HAS ANYONE SEEN THE GONG SHOW MOVIE LATELY?

Yesterday, I was flipping thru the channels as I was cleaning my ratty-ass apartment. I then seen Chuck Barris in a steam bath talking to a ghost/aboritional figure. I hit the 'info' button on my cable-clicker which it turned out to be the "Gong Show Movie". Having seen "Confessions" not so long ago, I put down my Vacuum cleaner and was glued to the televison. The movie, like any typical bad 80's movie, had no plot and was pretty much cry for attention by a washed up TV star. Yet, there was something about this movie that kept me going. Soderbergh and/or Clooney must have seen this movie. There are sooo many parralels between these two movies, it was eerie. Obviously, Chuckie Baby had a hand in this too, but Chuckie Baby turned into Charles Barris at the end of both movies. At the end of "Gong", Barris was wandering around a desert unshaven and very reclusive. You had seen the virtual self-destruction pretty much in real life. Sam Rockwell's portrayal of Barris and his breakdown in "Confessions" was much slower than Barris' own in "Gong". With the exception of the desert which is replaced by an aprtment in LA (or was it Philly?), the breakdown is very similar.Ironically, this was shown on the Sundance Channel- yes THE GONG SHOW MOVIE! Robert Downey Sr. co-wrote the movie! Here's some small facts, comments, and questions I picked up in the movie. -Firstly, the "infamous flashing scene" where Jaye P. Morgan's small but perfect breasts are seen in full, unadulterated glory. With both nipples erect! I wonder if this started Julie Andrews to drop her Ta Ta's in SOB. Jaye P.'s are much smaller but much better looking! -Is "Red", Barris' then real-life g/f (later wife) in the Gong Show Movie is in any way related to the Drew Barrymore character in Confessions? -When is the Gong Show movie is EVER coming out on DVD or even VHS? What about a package deal with Confessions? -Della, Chuck's daughter was pretty much highlighted in the Gong Show Movie but not Confessions. I know about her tragic demise, but was Barris still mourning her while writing/making confessions? -I know Barris written a new book, is that going to be made into a motion picture soon? $Insertformulahere$

Never saw it, but The Gong Show Movie is here. Please sign your comments. 216.37.227.202 00:09, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Airdates

Someone should explain the airdates a little better, I think the NBC version was on from 1976-1978 and the syndie version was on till 1980, but this isn't explained well.

Samuel L. Jackson

DOes he actually have anything to do with the Unknown Comic? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.23.228.2 (talk) 10:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC).

Green Jello/Jelly

The article claims the band Green Jello (later Green Jelly) appeared on the Gong Show. How is this possible... the show went off the air in 1980 and according to the band's Wikipedia article they didn't form until 1981. I find their appearance on the show hard to believe...Cris Varengo 19:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

They may have appeared in the 1988-89 version. I'll look into it. Michael Q. Schmidt (talk) 08:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Another Recurring Bit

I am disappointed that one of my favorite recurring bits was not mentioned: The Flying Zucchini Brothers. They would come out and demonstrate their strength and agility by performing "feats" that required neither strength nor agility. mmg 72.95.128.220 00:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

If I find a cite, I will gladly add them. Michael Q. Schmidt (talk) 08:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Gary Owens

I had always heard that Barris fired him. He even said as much in an interview promoting his book a few years back (it might have been Later with Bob Costas). Although not mentioning him by name, he stated something like something like "the guy we originally hired just didn't seem to get it - he would be visibly distrought when an act he liked got gonged, and I kept telling him 'look, this isn't a talent show'. So I just decided to take it over myself". I think this should be incorparated into the article, which gives only a mere mention of Owens' full-season tenure. Richiestern 03:44, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

• Barris was more likely to refer to John Barbour, who hosted the NBC version for a brief time. GSN aired the first NBC (I think) Gong Show several years ago w/Barbour and he looked to be playing things straight. Owens on the other hand lasted a full season. Also, a picture of Owens was on the Gong set well into Barris' tenure hugging a contestant (or a judge, I don't know) and giving a facetious(?) look to the camera. I don't think any sign of Owens would be retained if he were fired along with his boss' disapproval. There are several dicussions on the Net about the Gong Show before Barris hosted but 'twould be nice to have a definitive source.--CRiyl 05:27, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Barris was said to have liked Owens, he was referring to John Barbour, who lasted one unaired week. Chuck enjoyed the daytime show so much that he took over for Gary on the nighttime version. FamicomJL 15:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

A few minor tweaks....

I have added additional informations under "later incarnations" to include that the latest incarnation "The Gong Show with Dave Attell" has taped 8 episodes and I've listed the celebrity judges of these episodes. I've also placed IMDB refs in "external links" to document other incarnations. Under the section "spin-offs" I removed the Dave Attell reference as it is better covered under incarnations and the new show's name as given in that section was incorrect. The reference I included from "Hollywood Junket" is 100% correct and factual reporting. When the show gets promoted over the next few weeks, this information will have additional sources and I will then add to or replace that particular ref. Michael Q. Schmidt (talk) 22:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

• To user:Cumulus Clouds I understand your feelings about blogs, since they sometimes voice opinion rather than fact. But just as in any good report, the source you removed was (and will be proven to be) completely accurate and of a neutral point of view. In the next week or three I will be able to post many. much better sources that will further provide verifiabilty for the informations I had added. And even though Wiki:CS, Wiki:RS, and Wikipedia:Verifiability do not specifically rule out blogs, I will at this time acquiesce to your deletion and will later happily provide a dozen or more so you can easily see and understand that the information I presented was accurate observation and report of fact and not simply an opinion. I did not write the article so my use of it is not Wiki:OR. My agreeing with its details is also not Wiki:OR. Further, your removing the links showing the history of the Gong Show later incarnations seems a bit of a stretch... specially since they provided context and history to the section to which they referred and allowed a reader to confirm the informations in that section. If each incarnation had their own seperate article on Wiki, editors would ralley around including all the articles into this one. Since the facts presented in that paragraph were not themselves sourced and the single IMDB cite that you allowed to remain) about the original Gong Show made no mention of the later show, I added the sources as per Wiki:RS. Lastly, your writing "we don't need so many references to IMDB" could give a reader the impression that there was a consensus in your actions, when in fact you had not made any notation on the article's talk page. It might be be best to use "I" rather than "we" when speaking only for yourself. Thank you. Michael Q. Schmidt (talk) 01:41, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

To User:Cumulus Clouds...

I am open to all your input, as you have had much more time to spend on Wiki than do I. On June 29th I made some minor improvements to the article on The Gong Show and discussed my changes here on the aticle's page and here on the talk page of User talk:Darknus823, the editor whose material I was correcting. You reverted my contributions with a personal claim that "blogs are not sources, your personal experience is OR and we don't need so many references to IMD". I replied, just I am doing now, with a redirect on your talk page indicating that I had responded to your revert here on this article's talk page. I accepted your criticism and promised to wait for proper sourcing before returning the valid informations you deleted. On July 1st and 2nd I improved the article and added reliable Wiki:NPOV sources that honored Wiki:NOR and were in complete compliance with Wiki:CS. On July 5th, you again returned to the article and reverted to an earlier (here read pre-User:MichaelQSchmidt version, without discussion, without regard to Wiki:Consensus, and with a claim that it was a "revert to last good version". However, your having never edited or shown any interest in this article prior to my own interest in improving it and your being adamant in your opinion that I should not be allowed to contribute to Wikipedia, make your reversion of properly sourced and contextual material appear in violation of Wiki:COI. It might be much better if you let other editors review my works and for you to distance yourself from me in all ways. Please. One of Wiki's most sacrosanct policies is Wiki:EP, which states in its very first section that "perfection is not required" and instucts that no matter what an editor does, he should "endeavour to preserve information". Your actions have the appearance of being in violation of this policy, so I ask that you refrain. Further, your following me around and reverting my contributions, specially when you make no improvement or contribution yourself to such articles yourself, is a breech of Wikiquette and smacks strongly of stalking. I have asked for input and you do not respond. So I ask again... if you're going to follow me around and study my every contribution, let's at least work together to make this article better and bring it up to date. Acting without consensus and assumming bad faith are vilolations of Wiki:Civility. If you continue these actions you may yourself be blocked.... so let's work together and not at odds. Michael Q. Schmidt (talk) 19:46, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

• You are under investigation for sockpuppetry and until that investigation concludes I would recommend you stop attempting to promote yourself on Wikipedia. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 20:07, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Removed from proper context, your statement is biased, misleading and inappropriate in this discussion of the article. I am trying to contribute. How, by any wild stretch of the imagination, does my attempting to improve an article about The Gong Show promote myself? If you do not cease your inappropriate reverts of contextual and sourced information, I will seek mediation. If you continue these actions you may yourself be blocked for repeated violations of guideline and policy. Michael Q. Schmidt (talk) 21:08, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

• I seriously doubt that, but attempting to write yourself into an article about a show you've appeared in qualifies as self-promotion. Again, I would wait until the sockpuppet case against you closes and all the checkuser evidence has been collected. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 00:05, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

• (Sound of dropping jaw} I have absolutely not in any way, shape, or form tried to write myself into this article... and yet you have posted that blatant untruth on this discussion page as if it were fact. This article is tagged, asking for cleanup and cites. The history of this page will show that I have corrected a mis-spelled show name (after notifying the original editor) and added properly sourced, neutral context to expand a section. After your initial revertion, you ignored my requests for help, so I will ask again... please, let's work together to improve this article. And if you cannot work with me, then please step away so that less biased editor can assist. Michael Q. Schmidt (talk) 03:42, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

• CC, Mr. Schmidt's name has not appeared in this article at all. That he is interested in a show in which he did or did not participate is irrelevant. People on Wikipedia write about things they are interested in, simple as that. There is no wikicrime there. Moreover, what you would do with regards to closure on either case is also irrelevant. Mr. Schmidt is currently a member of Wikipedia in good standing and is permitted to make changes within the Wikipedia construct (WP:RS, WP:V, etc). All his edits appear to be sourced and deleting them because you think he is a sockpuppet is putting the cart before the horse. Please revert your changes until such a time as those accusations prove to be true. — BQZip01 — ^talk 07:31, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

• No. Putting the cart before the horse would be calling him a "user in good standing." There is little doubt now that he is the most recent incarnation of L.L.King and that he is once again using Wikipedia to try and promote a show that he appeared on (going so far as to insert his own appearance on it). This user has done nothing else in his entire career except promote himself and his projects on this encyclopedia and my patience with it has reached its absolute end. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 16:28, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

And again(!) we have "going so far as to insert his own appearance on it". So I wheeled out my handy little tool and searched the last 100 versions for the string "midt" and I got "Total diff's: 460 - examined 102 pages / Found in 0 diff pages". Cumulus, could you please, please help us all out with your specific diff? Honest, I'd like to fix my program if it has a bug. Franamax (talk) 23:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Gene Gene the Dancing Machine

I can appreciate someone changing the descriptor from "overweight" back to "obese", but even the article HERE on Wiki only refers to him as a "genial heavy-set man". In an article at Everything2.com he is called "hulky". In an article at TVAcres he is called "beefy". A popular video clip of his performance HERE shows Gene as heavyset... perhaps bulky... but by no means obese at the Gong Show point in his career. The obesity happened later in his life and was one of the causes of his medical problems. An image on this PAGE shows him at that time to be only modestly overweight... and not even "hulky". I am not introducing these sources into the article... only offering them because they cast doubt on using "obese" in this case. "Obese" implies someone much heavier, so I am changing the term back to the more accurate and less negative "overweight". If someone can source the use of "obese" as a descriptor, I will gladly accept it. Michael Q. Schmidt (talk) 02:22, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

WHERE IS THE ORIGINAL **GONG** FROM THE GONG SHOW TODAY???

Please. Does anybody know??

Any ideas on how to track down the Original GONG?

I'll take any advice. Thanx!

Dauntless

A1ADauntless@yahoo.com 404 789 4204 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.25.156.61 (talk) 03:18, 10 July 2009 (UTC)