| Revision as of 15:58, 4 January 2008 editPlandu (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers36,221 edits →Split page into Old Gladiators and New Gladiators← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:30, 4 January 2008 edit undoJtrost (talk | contribs)4,275 editsm →Split page into Old Gladiators and New Gladiators: +sNext edit → | ||
| Line 71: | Line 71: | ||
| Just seems to me it would make the page quite a bit shorter. ] (]) 22:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC) | Just seems to me it would make the page quite a bit shorter. ] (]) 22:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
| I think two pages may turn out to be necessary, but we'll need to wait and see what the new show is actually like. Yes, the "trailer" for the new show makes it look significantly different than the old one, but the campiness still seems to be alive, for instance. Definitely a good question to consider. I say we see what the first couple of episodes are like and then discuss further. --] (]) 15:58, 4 January 2008 (UTC) | :I think two pages may turn out to be necessary, but we'll need to wait and see what the new show is actually like. Yes, the "trailer" for the new show makes it look significantly different than the old one, but the campiness still seems to be alive, for instance. Definitely a good question to consider. I say we see what the first couple of episodes are like and then discuss further. --] (]) 15:58, 4 January 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :I agree that the revival section should be split into its own page, but for a different reason. This page, quite honestly, is a disaster and is nowhere near being what a ] is according to WP standards. I think that if we break the revival into a separate article it will be easier for us to build a good article, and then if interests prevails we can do the same to this article. ] (<sup>]</sup> | <small>]</small> | <sub><span class="plainlinks"></span></sub>) 17:30, 4 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:30, 4 January 2008
 | Television B‑class | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
untitled comment
- At one point I read that the reason they didn't have more muscular contestants was because to qualify for the show you had to be able to do a number of pull-ups/chin-ups, eliminating some of the more muscular people who tried out.
- They also aired a celebrity episode with Picabo Street where she manhandled the gladiators in a number of the events (she has a very muscular lower body she used to her advantage).
- In the Swedish version in the early 2000's, the strong man Torbjörn Samuelsson tried to qualify for the show, but failed. Torbjörn Samuelsson qualified for the world final of the strong man sport some year back then, and his older brother Magnus won the world final in 2000. A picture of Torbjörn Samuelsson at Magnus Samuelsson's official web page. Ironically, even if this huge strong man — I guess he weighed some 130 kg = 290 lbs — would have qualified, he would still have been much smaller than the gladiator Atlas — weighing some 150 kg = 310 lbs with a defined body, probably close to 170 kg = 370 lbs off-season when he neither competed in bodybuilding nor participated in the Swedish gladiator show. A picture of Atlas, probably the biggest of all versions of Gladiators. I have seen Atlas as himself, the submarine officer Roger Zapfe, off-season in a cooking show, and then he was huge. Jens Persson (213.67.64.22 19:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC))
Why did the show stop?
Was it canceled? What were the reasons? I think it would be important to include this in the article as well...
Thank you all...
YouTube links
This article is one of thousands on Misplaced Pages that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed, feel free to ask me on my talk page and I'll review it personally. Thanks. ---J.S (t|c) 04:34, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- Looks like someone is on a personal crusade...yay 198.6.46.11 16:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Severed Pinkie Finger?
Didn't someone (one of the contestants or one of the gladiators) get a finger torn off in one of the shows? 24.45.8.70 17:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, that happened during season three. I can not remember the contestant's name, but it happened during the joust. Before this happened, gloves were optional to contenders, and because of it, they were mandated in the future episodes.
Proof, please?
I'm sure if this is the correct way to answer this in this section but:
The contestants name is Marek Wilczynski. It happened during the Joust event as he lost his balance and fell towards the gladiator's platform. He tried to break his fall with his left hand and it hit the gladiator's platform. I'm not sure that it actually severed the pinkie finger but may have opened it up or took a chunk off. He had to withdraw from the competition as a result of the injury.
Season 1 Champion
Season One Champions: Brian Hutson-Tracy Phillips Season Two Champions: Lucian Anderson-Bridget Venturi Season One vs Season Two (Titled: Grand Championships): Brian Hutson-Bridget Venturi http://www.tv.com/american-gladiators/show/13743/episode_guide.html?season=2&tag=season_nav;next
Season Two occured in 1990 and 1991, not 1989 and 1990. They are half seasons. --ChrisP2K5 04:42, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Panther?
This youtube video has Panther as a female gladiator, but she's not listed. What's up with that? --AW 20:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
She never was on the TV show. She was a live show Gladiator. --ChrisP2K5 14:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Change in attitude?
I think it would be worth mentioning how the gladiators went originally from arrogant angry people who always taunted and mocked contestants to more amicable competitors who showed respect for contestants and shook hands and helped them up and all that, which fundamentally changed the tone of the characters and show. TheHYPO 13:10, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
If you notice, though, in the last season they sort of went back to that, and I think that it didn't help matters much. --ChrisP2K5 19:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Cause/Effect in lead?
In the lead section for the article, it discusses the revival. The article says that it was slated to be taped in late November, but because of the strike, it's being premiered on January 6. There is no reason given for the connection between the two events. I can't make sense of it, but I'm hoping someone else could. The article implies a cause and effect relationship between the two events, but there is a difference between being taped and being aired. Hezekiah957 (talk) 03:46, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- You're right, the statement doesn't make sense as written. The strike doesn't even demonstrably have any effect on this show. If it were scheduled to be taped in late November, the strike would have delayed taping. However since it is a "reality" show not likely employing WGA members, it is not relevant. Nevertheless NBC has begun promoting the premiere as coming in early January 2008, so I've amended the intro to say just that.21:50, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Nice job on the rewrite. Hezekiah957 (talk) 03:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
2008 Season - Events list
Recently, edits have been made (most recent) adding numerous games to the list. The sentence does not purport to be an exhaustive list; rather, it merely says that "certain" such events incorporate water. Now, I wouldn't be opposed to anyone picking different games to list, but I believe that it should be kept to 3 or 4 max. Otherwise, it starts looking sloppy. Also, mention of games to debut this coming season (specifically Earthquake and Hit Hit & Run) are being repeatedly added. However, as far as I'm aware, this information is coming from people who were at the tapings, which hardly counts as a reliable source; Pro Wrestling results are not incorporated into the article until they are aired (as is the case with WWE Friday Night SmackDown! among others), and I see no reason for this to be any different. However, if a reliable source can be cited, I will not object to their inclusion. Hezekiah957 (talk) 02:32, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Split page into Old Gladiators and New Gladiators
Just curious if anyone else thinks two pages might be helpful. Although there are several similarities between the two shows, there are also a lot of differences that I think might warrant a second page. For example, currently there are two events sections and for the most part, both shows have the same events. And the gladiators from the first show won't be on the second. Just seems to me it would make the page quite a bit shorter. Feezy501 (talk) 22:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- I think two pages may turn out to be necessary, but we'll need to wait and see what the new show is actually like. Yes, the "trailer" for the new show makes it look significantly different than the old one, but the campiness still seems to be alive, for instance. Definitely a good question to consider. I say we see what the first couple of episodes are like and then discuss further. --Andrew (talk) 15:58, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- I agree that the revival section should be split into its own page, but for a different reason. This page, quite honestly, is a disaster and is nowhere near being what a good article is according to WP standards. I think that if we break the revival into a separate article it will be easier for us to build a good article, and then if interests prevails we can do the same to this article. Jtrost ( | C | #) 17:30, 4 January 2008 (UTC)