Talk:Ricky Gervais
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
---
[edit] Name
He said in one of the old XFM shows that his given name is just Ricky, not Richard.
He also stated in an interview that his middle name is spelt 'Dene'.
[edit] Trivia
His sister was born on September 1st? My god, how fascinating...surely this needs a clean-up?195.172.15.93 09:42, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
== First Guest Writer ==Surely Conan O'Brien counts as the first "guest star" on the Simpsons who also wrote an episode.69.249.212.254 23:06, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
== Second guest writer == famous catchphrase from new series EXTRAS is : are you havin' a laugh? are they havin' a laugh? <or what>
Newbyguesses 04:09, 28 March 2007 (UTC)Newbyguesses
[edit] Arrested Devlopment
No evidence he was ever on Arrested Development. IMDB says he wasn't on it. I'm removing it.
- According to an interview with an actor from Arrested Development they were trying to get Ricky on the show but it never happened, sadly.
[edit] Sacked=
He was not sacked- he took redundancy- much like david brent. I'm changing it.
[edit] Pronunciation of Surname
I've removed the sentence referring to Ricky's surname; it's not pronounced like that. I'll put a corrected version back when I've worked one out jamesgibbon 22:23, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
"nice" and "normal" should be: nice and "normal"
Ricky consistently pronounces his own name as "dʒɜːˈveɪz" on the Ricky Gervais show, despite how the announcer pronounces it (as "dʒɜːˈveɪs"). Therefore, unless anyone has evidence pointing otherwise, I'm changing the pronunciation to "dʒɜːˈveɪz" with a "z". HorseloverFat 13:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps we could include both pronunciations. Chovain 18:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] opinion
"The first, six-episode season of The Office aired in the UK in July/August 2001 to little fanfare or attention, but word-of-mouth, re-runs and DVDs helped spread the word, building up huge momentum and anticipation for the second season"
this is a load of received-opinion nonsense. For nearly a month before it's BBC2 debut there were several trailers and teasers running every single day, a luxury denied to the vast majority of new comedy in that period. It also got prominent reviews in the media section of every national sunday paper. Just because the above quote is the sort of insider nonsense parroted by idiots like Alison Graham doesn't make it any more true. If nobody can disprove all this i will edit the above section to remove the untruths it contains. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.202.216.214 (talk • contribs).
- Thanks. I've added a reference:
-
- Described as the "sleeper hit of last summer" it is telling to note that on its first run, The Office attained ratings of only about 1.5 million. That its second series was so widely anticipated and peaked at around 5 million viewers must bear testimony to the power of "word of mouth", and the ongoing ability of British television to recognise a hit series when it sees one. [1]
- Also see:
-
- What is now a landmark in British comedy went by relatively unnoticed at the time. [ ... ] By the end of the first series not much was known about The Office. [ ... ] Second Series starts: Most every magazine had something about The Office somewhere [2]
- And:
-
- Six weeks of filming and a further seven weeks editing resulted in The Office going on-air for the first time in the summer of 2001. The viewing figures, whilst fine for BBC2 at that time of year, weren't spectacular. Importantly though, the show was popular with the critics and was 'pick of the day' in quite a few newspapers during the first run. [ ... ] Then Welsh pop-combo, the Stereophonics released a version of 'Handbags and Gladrags' (the tune over the credits in The Office). BBC2 repeated the series and got lots more viewers and The Office was fast becoming a bit of a hit. [3]
- chocolateboy 19:07, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
Cheers, but i was mainly referring to the huge promotional campaign that was all over BBC2 at the time. The ratings may have just been 'quite good', but it was given a bigger internal hype job than any other *new* BBC2 comedy that year. I guess it's fair to say "..to comparatively little attention" but NOT "to little fanfare"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.213.215.238 (talk • contribs).
- Hi again. If you can provide some evidence from a reputable source that the promotional campaign for The Office was perceived to be bigger, more expensive or more relentless than that of other comparable BBC comedies, then please provide it so that we can improve the article. In the absence of any such evidence, I've restored the original wording, which is verifiable:
-
- The first series emerged, with minimal fanfare, in the summer of 2001 (The Daily Telegraph)
-
- It was launched, without any fanfare, into the tranquil backwater of BBC2’s midweek summer schedule. (The Scotsman)
-
- &c.
- chocolateboy 20:56, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
You can't quote the newspapers or anything of that ilk as evidence for anything like this. "Sleeper hit" is one of their most popular phrases along with the likes of "this is a bit of a marmite show". The fact of the matter is that everyone should be able to remember the large run up to the series debut, I distinctly remember thinking it was over-hyped in fact and chose not to watch it after the bbc's last over-hyped "cutting-edge" comedy (The Royal Family). Thankfully I started watching some way in to the series and all was well. My point is that its unlikely we'll be able to find evidence to the contrary because newspapers and magazines all tend to jump on the same bandwagon and simply love dictating how they spotted an early gem.. but if someone can find the bbc's promotional material and schedule for the first series of the Office I assure you you'll see it was heavily hyped.. I know this because just about everyone seems to remember; I remember many people discussing it before it was launched, for example. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by sausage (talk • contribs).
- That's not how Wikipedia works. See Wikipedia:Cite sources, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:NPOV and, in particular, Wikipedia:No original research.
- chocolateboy 21:25, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
I am fully aware that is not how wikipedia works and I never had any inclination of using my own or doing any research (although a pr schedule for The Office series 1 from the bbc would not fall under original research as it itself would be the source). What I thought I made clear was that newspapers and alike cited aren't reliable sources for the very reasons I mentioned (ie. they're wrong), additionally they are by nature filled full of writing that appeals because it is an opinionated piece; art really can't be reported on in a factual way whilst getting to the heart of it either and whilst this obviously doesn't mean such articles go without facts completely those that can be found within articles aside from the very basics are very rarely just facts with no better example than exactly what we're talking about as talked about in the daily telegraph article. I don't think what we're debating over should be removed from the article.. its important to show the varying sides of public opinion on all elements of popular culture but surely it should be presented as such, opinion? Ie. preceding a few sentences with the likes of "regarded by some" and "that many felt". I don't think that would harm the article regardless of which side you fall on this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by sausage (talk • contribs).
- If you disagree with the policies cited above, please take it up on the relevant talk pages. And, yes, unless you can demonstrate that your sentiments have been published by a reputable source, your interpretation of a PR schedule for The Office would fall under the rubric of original research:
-
- Wikipedia articles include material on the basis of verifiability, not truth. That is, we report what other reliable secondary sources have published, whether or not we regard the material as accurate. In order to avoid doing original research, and in order to help improve the quality of Wikipedia articles, it is essential that any primary-source material, as well as any generalization, analysis, synthesis, interpretation, or evaluation of information or data has been published by a third-party reputable publication (that is, not self-published) that is available to readers either from a website (other than Wikipedia) or through a public library. [4]
- As for "regarded by some" and "that many felt", see Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words.
- chocolateboy 21:35, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Bloody hell, Wikipedia actually prefers to have false information provided by a newspaper than an interesting accuracy provided by a member of the public? That's jolly silly isn't it? I also remember the relentless trailing (as do a lot of people seeing as it was only a few years ago) and this method of covering it up to ensure The Office is made to appear the classic it isn't is very annoying. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Solid Snail (talk • contribs) 13:35, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia policies say that we prefer what reputable sources say to what members of the public say. If it turns out that all the reputable sources are wrong, and the public contribution is right, then that's the price of WP:RS and WP:NOR. In general, they keep the garbage out. If those policies were not in place, then how would we decide when the reliable sources were wrong, and the public were right?
- Then again, it seems unlikely that numerous reliable sources would have it wrong, and none agree with the "interesting accuracy provided by a member of the public". That's why these policies are in place. Can you find a reference that agrees with your views? Chovain 04:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Interesting, is it not, how none of the references for this particular bit of opinion all date from late 2002 or later? And none of them are from the period in question? But that's fine. Clearly sources with arguable known bias reporting more than a year after the fact are automatically more reliable than primary sources that happen to not be journalists. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by arglebargle (talk • contribs).
[edit] Fraudsters
Kenneth Speight, 39, of no fixed abode, was jailed for two-and-a-half years and Craig Reeves, 30, of Alton, Hants, for two years for conspiracy to defraud.
Well at least Kenneth will be pleased he's got somewhere to stay for the next two-and-a-half years, hot meals, hot showers, groups of hot & horny men wishing to get to know him better.
[edit] The 'Ricky Gervais Show' podcast
This is referenced in this article. It should have an article of its own. CNETs The Daily Buzz podcast has its own page and it has no way near as big a listenership. According to iTunes and the authors of the show itself, it is the world's most popular podcast. This should be recognised. It is relevant to Wikipedia. (Anon)
- This podcast only has a limited number of episodes- it's not an ongoing series. I don't quite see how you could write much about it, but you could always try and see if it survives WP:VFD. Mark1 23:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
The podcast is being extended indefinitely ...but now they charge for downloads
[edit] Spicks and Specks
- On the Australian TV show Spicks and Specks, the contestants had to watch Ricky Gervais on the music video of Bitter Heart. His haircut was pretty amazing there, especially the part on his left side, which was typically New Romantic. This was for the music video segment where they had to watch and observe. This was the first episode for the New Year: February 15 2006.
- Just thought this might be interesting for Ricky Gervais watchers especially those like me who didn't know or appreciate he had a life before The Office.
- --EuropracBHIT 10:03, 15 February 2006 (UTC).
[edit] "Home-made pilot"
Was the pilot of The Office *really* "home made", as the article states? I was under the impression, admittedly I forget from what source, that it was made as the final project of Stephen Merchant's time on the BBC television director's course? Angmering 18:39, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Driving
I'm sure Gervais can drive - he is seen doing so at least once in the Christmas specials. Sebastian789 15:32, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
-They shot that on a carriage (or whatever the technical term is) which is a standard technique used for filming driving shots, where the car is towed along so the performer doesn't have to act and drive at the same time. In the documentary on the Specials dvd you can see Gervais mucking about and waving at people in passing cars. Mseyers 06:13, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
-He also states specifically in the DVD commentary for the christmas episode that he can't drive.
[edit] Simpsons
'The episode was universally slated, though many Gervais fans ranked it as one the best ever in the series.' How was it universally slated if a load of people thought it was one of the best ever?
No one (let alone "a load of people") said it was the best ever episode. Not even Gervais would claim that. Some people claimed it was the best in the current series which is hardly surprising given the low quality of the scripts in the current mass-produced computer generated Simpsons era. But compared to the earlier Simpsons series it was mediocre at best.
See the comments on the following page which show how badly the episode was received by fans: http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/organgrinder/2006/04/springfield_in_his_step.html
[edit] Controversy
"Gervais is wanted by the Quebec City Police regarding an alleged assault upon Radical Conservative Alain Deuph Dephre."
Huh? Does anyone have a link to this that isn't some crackpot's blog entry? Mseyers 23:29, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Picture
Surely there is a more flattering picture of Ricky taken in the context of his career, or for publicity? In the current head picture he looks miserable. Minglex 21:20, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
I see no picture at all now - surely there must be one somewhere - a nice one we can all smile at? YYEM 14:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Can someone clarify copyright for the image currently being used (Ricky and Jane) as it's due to be deleted within 7 days. --Durzel 10:52, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Atheist
'"Gervais is a believer of the atheist doctrine."' is an oxymoronic statement. Atheism is the lack of belief and there is no "atheist doctrine". I changed to "Gervais is an atheist."QEDQED 19:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Erm.. no.. atheism is the 'belief' or opinion that there is no God - what you are describing is closer to [agnosticism]. Magic Pickle 19:31, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Calling atheism a belief is like calling baldness a hair colour. You wouldn't call it a belief is someone said they don't believe in the tooth fairy or unicorns. 87.198.133.90 21:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Ethanol??
Doesnt this mean methanol? Ethanol is normal alcohol; a small amount might make you drunk but it wont make you blind? yes, whoever wrote this must mean methanol.
[edit] Semi-protection request
I've made a request for page protection whilst this is sorted out. -- London UK (talk) 16:32, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Radio 1
Has anyone got any solid information about Ricky Gervais and Stephen Merchant's time with Radio 1? They used to do a show there (considering Ricky met Steve at Xfm, it must have been during the time after they left pre-takeover Xfm and joined the Capital-owned Xfm), but they got fired for insulting Simon Mayo. A little information is given in their 47th show of their 2nd recorded series at Xfm (hear it here, the section entitled "Censorship"). Gtpod 20:39, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
They did not have a 'show' on Radio 1, but used to do short comedy inserts for The Breezeblock, a late-night show hosted by Mary Ann Hobbs, circa 1999-2000 (so around the time that Gervais was also appearing on The 11 O'Clock Show). These usually involved Gervais doing Chris Morris-style 'man in the street' interviews, most of them involving attempting to get old people to say rude words. Their claim to have been fired after insulting Simon Mayo is highly suspect, given that they disappeared from the show around the time Gervais' television career was taking off, and that Mayo is a good sport and has never seemed to mind comic ribbing that much. Merchant also did bits and pieces of comedy on other Radio 1 shows, appearing as 'Steve The Student' on Sara Cox's breakfast show for a couple of months circa 2000.
[edit] Comedy Tumbleweed Award
This is not notable. Please stop adding it to articles. It's a meme, created by a discussion forum. The day they get independent and non-trivial press coverage, they'll be considered notable (and I don't mean the entertainment writer writing about what they saw in their day of blog surfing). Chovain 16:00, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
A link has been provided to an article from Metro. That counts as independent and non-trivial press coverage. Really this just smacks of people being uneasy with the idea that some people out there might not like Ricky Gervais. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 138.253.102.34 (talk • contribs) 16:10, 15 December 2006 (UTC).
- It was trivial coverage. An entertainment writer was writing about a notable award (the British Comedy Awards), and mentioned on the side that they found these "awards" given out by a discussion forum. Non-trivial coverage would be if the journalist actually decided to interview a representative of organisation that gave out the awards. The Golden Raspberries get non-trivial coverage, because journalists can actually be bothered doing interviews. In this case, the journalist was just reporting on a funny site they saw.
- This is not a conspiracy against the free flow of information. It's not the Ricky Gervais illuminati covering up the web award that is as big as the Golden Globes (I don't even know or care who he is - I'm not British). This is just the cold, hard enforcement of WP policies and guidelines. Chovain 16:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Quick question: Why is the Tumbleweeds not notable but "His favourite Christmas song is Fairytale of New York by The Pogues" is? --Mister Six 17:13, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
- Good point. I've removed that line. ArtVandelay13 19:53, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
- Awesome. Now remove the rest of them. --82.13.194.56 21:02, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- If there're uncontroversial edits you'd like to make, feel free to go ahead and make those edits yourself. Anonymous users can edit too. Chovain 18:26, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- Awesome. Now remove the rest of them. --82.13.194.56 21:02, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Hen Fap
In "Extras", why does Ricky Gervais say "We want hen fap" in four of the 12 episodes? "Hen fap" is more commonly associated with rapper Kanye West, are they friends?
[edit] External links
I've removed another fansite, and a bunch of links to interviews. We are not a link repository. If anyone can incorporate info from these interviews into the article, then these might make good references. Chovain(t|c) 23:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Date of Birth
The date in the Box is not the same as the date in the text... --84.58.2.55 23:06, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Favourite food
Ricky's favourite food are hard boiled eggs dipped in marmite, in Politics he recounts how Stephen Merchant introduced them to him.
Someone keeps adding this, with different names associated with it, under the References section. It's probably an example of lying for comic effect; but if it isn't, then it shouldn't be put in that section ... Anyway Gervais shouldn't be allowed to keep altering his own page .... Kbthompson 16:57, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Seona Dancing
Can someone provide some real evidence that this band existed? I just can't believe this is true, especially because of that bit about it being really popular in the Philippines. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.198.133.90 (talk • contribs).
-
- http://www.seonadancing.com/ - Gervais is quite open about having been in the band, and it's quite well known in the UK. ArtVandelay13 21:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] California
Isn't California by 2Pac Shakur, not Snoop? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by The duke of hazzard (talk • contribs) 21:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC).