Jump to content

Talk:Juke Box Jury

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Beatles' Appearance on JBJ

[edit]

Would it be appropriate to mention the Beatles' appearance on the programme in more detail? It was the only time that the panel all came from the same group and ISTR Bill Cotton claimed booking the band as his best idea ever (to which one wag retorted that wiping the programme was his worst!). Unfortunately, the programme was wiped but I remember watching it and that instead of the Hit or Miss cards, there were "happy" or "sad" Beatle faces which they held up. Apepper 17:51, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sootbox Jury

[edit]

Re cultural references, The Sooty Show used to have a Sootbox Jury segment. I can't find any evidence for that unfortunately so I haven't edited the article. --Northernhenge (talk) 22:36, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2011 re-write

[edit]

well, we've finally sorted the 2006 request to sort the Beatles stuff, and added a mega-amount of info to the entry (thankfully all nicely citeable). However - it's been a bit of a disgrace that such a critical program has had such a minimal article, and there's still plenty to go, people. (Actually the amount of citeable resources are pitiful) I've updated what I can into hopefully a better article, and something slowly approaching what is deserving. Sadly the list of panellists is kiltered to actors as they're the people with online ref sites, so the available lists are very much biased towards them (djs were on so many more panels than there's info for).

Not quite done yet - the later series stuff is, I realise, not tidied yet.

I had misgivings about the list of panellists at first, but in fact it provides a great historical snapshot of who was cool at the time (at least as far as the broadcasting heirarchy thought). I suspect a list of what was played week by week would solidify perspective even more, but that way madness lies!

My hope is that this will be at least a solid basis for research into what is a fast disappearing, if not already shamefully lost, bit of important UK musical history, Don't worry - I'm prepared to be disappointed. We just do what we can. Brieflysentient (talk) 17:01, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great stuff! I suggest we need some consistency over the date style, especially in the list of episodes, and I'm not sure about capitalising the word Juror. But those are very minor quibbles - you've done a great job, and plenty of scope for more work as you say. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:09, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
PS: I notice failed to notice that the article doesn't seem to mention the part where the performers of the record being judged were hidden behind a curtain, unknown to the jury, and then emerged after the record was judged either a hit or a miss, often to their great embarrassment or anger. I'll look for sources. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:27, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(In a flippant stylee) - I'd have thought that the phrase 'Most weeks the performers of one of the records would be hidden behind a screen and emerge to "surprise" the panel after they had given their verdict.[3]' would have covered it
Perhaps you need a beer in hand - I suggest ample Ansells Cider, which is what I wrote it with :-}
as I said in the other message, which I picked up first - I'll pick up the date consistency thing tomorrow. My main concern was whether it needed a table or not, but it seems ok without, so I'll continue with xx.xx.xxxx.
as for Juror/juror - I did it both ways. Thought was panellist is generic, Juror was specific to program, but it doesn't matter which way.
We'll get there. This is yet another piece of music history which shouldn't be lost - and I'm still shocked as to how difficult it was to scrape what we have up! Brieflysentient (talk) 17:49, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
having rolled about laughing over the flamboyant use of deletion above (and probably scorched dinner as a result - Moroccan chicken since you asked) can I please say that looking for sources is still a grand idea - I've found more by specific very pointed querying this week than I would have thought would have been missed by the usual Google, a lesson somewhere, I think. I'm on the way through a nmuber of other left-field queries to see if there's anything else I can find before a final tidy of the article as best I can. But tonight belongs to dinner and wines Brieflysentient (talk) 19:03, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Adding guest juror information

[edit]

Just a word of warning: I've come across far too many sites where the info on who appeared as a juror and when is inaccurate. For example the mcomet site entries - especially the Susan Stranks one http://www.mcomet.com/celebrity/Susan_Stranks-2170790/ - are decidedly dodgy - the dates there MAY BE correct for her (although I haven't been able to cross-refer with any other source) but the other guests in the entries are simply one week's guests on a JBJ she was on transposed time and time again. I've only added jurors from reputable actor/musician sites or where it's been well established and cross-referrable in more than one place. Brieflysentient (talk) 15:53, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2011 rewrite update

[edit]

That looks like about all I can squeeze from sources at the moment. Although I have a couple of other minor bits to add later this week, I have a suspicion that pretty well all that's left in the way of useful info that doesn't descend into major trivia will be found in references from Radio Times and the many music press articles that aren't online, which is a lengthy process to hunt out and transcribe, or just lost forever. For example, the majority of the holes in the appearances list will be dj guest slots - the available sources are heavily kilted to actors, as its their stuff that's online; and I suspect thet the BBC records, inaccessible as they are, are as incomplete as they appear to be.

I'm aware of diluting the article by adding too much, so sadly couldn't squeeze in the line of fascinating trivia such as Kenneth Williams revelatory comments on his feelings about appearing, and the comments about Pink Floyd's Arnold Layne (which clearly dug deep) ... and Sooty is sooo trivial but such a good thing to have! There's also lots of details on what tracks were played (and on many occasions the jury's sadly misguided comments) if you hunt hard enough - sadly not appropriate for an encyclowhatsity entry. I suspect we're roughly at a point where the article can't go too far further other than filling in the guest spot gaps.

I do think there's good solid reasoning to have a 'cultural importance' section, with a little moving round of what's already there and a bit of delving into the social history curriculum material already available would facilitate that. I'd like to tease this into 'good article' status, if anyone wants to help/guide. Perhaps that would help make up for the shameful near-forgotten state the historical memory of a classic piece of BBC Broadcasting and music history has got into --- (anyone want to subsidise a book??? ;-)) Brieflysentient (talk) 13:35, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My quick comment - apart from congratulating and thanking you for all the excellent additions - is that the cultural references section doesn't really need expanding overall, but it probably does need some of the dead wood trivia cutting out, and more considered authoritative commentary adding in. I think that the comments of people like Kenneth Williams and Pink Floyd on the show might well be worthwhile to include (I haven't checked what they said yet!), and some choice comments on the records would, I'm sure, be fascinating. I've already checked to see if long-forgotten panellists (probably a better word than "juror", by the way) like Gay Emma ([1]) and Henrietta Tiarks ([2]) deserve their own articles - sadly, probably not! Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:33, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Juke Box Jury. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:37, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Juke Box Jury. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:28, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Juke Box Jury. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:03, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Juke_Box_Jury&oldid=1206311263"