Talk:List of The Daily Show recurring segments

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Comedy Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Television Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: Television Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by American television task force. New York City Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

If I knew enough about wikipedia coding, I'd put it in...can someone add this to the current segments list? It's been going for a few days now, and if they keep it going, it'll last for at least 50 days. --hippie21st 3/31/2008 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.134.128.240 (talk • contribs) 16:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone should add a part in the no longer running sections about what's the pope blessing now. It presumabley finished after Jean Paul II died. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.194.249 (talk • contribs) 02:15, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"This Week In God" returned tonight with Samantha Bee hosting. I don't know enough about the page formatting to fix this in the opening listing & move it to where it needs to be. Can someone help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.150.38.232 (talk • contribs) 03:15, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be possible to move the years out of the section headers and into the paragraph text? The section headers are useful for linking to from other pages, but putting years in the section headers is just encouraging them to change more often, requiring the links that link to them to also be updated more often than is necessary. --Interiot 21:05, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the years from the section headers for the current segments, I'll do the past segments tomorrow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fernandobouregard (talk • contribs) 08:05, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Samantha Bee's "Are You Prepared" should be added to the current recurring elements. Does anybody know what year it started? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.171.182.135 (talk • contribs) 21:11, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was in 2006. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.187.251.56 (talk • contribs) 03:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about that segment that had children reading political discussions from news channels? I don't recall the title - Punditry as read by children? Vesperholly 07:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Great Moments in Punditry". Can anyone help about the years? --Liberlogos 17:35, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is the "Gaywatch" segment still around? What are the years, beginning and end? --Liberlogos 17:37, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone remember more about this segment? I don't want to add it with the vague memories I have. What I remember: before a commercial break, the music (which I can still remember to this day) comes over, and a correspondent (Vance?) would say something along the lines of "The following events all happened on the third week of October (or whatever). Can you name the year?" They would then go on to name (IIRC) extremely vague or obscure happenings, like "Factories in China produce goods and services for mass consumption", "Cellular respiration allows plant life to thrive on Earth", or "Marty Peters of Rogers, Arkansas buys a pack of Juicy Fruit from the Shell Station". The correspondent would list three consecutive years and ask "can you name the year?" After the commercial break, the answer would be revealed. Shorelander 23:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I remember waaaay back when Jon Stewart first took over he did this a few times. Given that there are segments that have only been aired once on this list, should this and other early Stewart pieces be added? 69.12.130.233 08:06, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the only one-time segment that is on this list is "FutureShock", and it seems like that segment was meant to soon become recurring. This list is only for recurring elements, so one-time sketches should typically not be included. Fernandobouregard 13:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a source on this, but I remember hearing that Lewis Black once wrote the BiB segments but now they are written for him by TDS writers. If someone has a source on this, it might be good to add to the article TheHYPO 18:06, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it was during an interview with Terry Gross on Fresh Air, but citing an audio recording is probably original research. 69.12.130.233 11:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does The Decider need to be on this list? It was just a bit they happened to do two of. I don't think it should count as a regular recurring bit. TheHYPO 18:18, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Colbert Report recurring elements was recently deleted on the grounds that the article contained too much original analysis. It's on deletion review right now, but if it goes, I'll be sorry to lose the list of recurring segments, which seemed acceptable under NOR. Now I'm wondering if this should be moved to List of The Daily Show recurring segements to avoid similar issues. -- Bailey^(talk) 18:15, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lists still need to be sourced. And since everything here is original research, I wouldn't be surprised if it got nominated for deletion pretty soon. Hopefully people can start adding sources for all these descriptions and dates. Fagstein 06:29, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not all OR. The list of recurring jokes is original research, and I'm not sure of the point of the list of books being included here, anyway, since the books aren't exactly an element of the show, but the list of segments can be sourced by the show itself, and therefore should be acceptable. According to NOR and RS, television shows can be used as primary sources as long they're being used descriptively, with no original analysis. That's why I second paring down this article to the list of regements and renaming. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lee Bailey (talk • contribs) 12:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But even that would be original research, since the show provides no such list, does not define for itself whether an event is recurring, and does not define the elements themselves. None of this can be verified without watching the every show and performing an analysis of what segments aired when. Fagstein 07:57, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would anyone oppose this move? -- Bailey^(talk) 12:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Policy allows us to use primary sources in a way that's descriptive, but not analytical. Obviously there's some subjectivity in that distinction. Determining what constitutes a "segment", though, is fairly straightforward, since these segments are explictly denoted by onscreen titles and referred to as segments. I'm not crazy about the "elements" angle, which is why I've suggested the name change. I'm not saying we still don't need a lot of sources. I'm just saying some of this material can be sourced to the show itself, particularly those segments that are currently airing, and that the list of segments stands the best chance of being sourceable -- yesterday I added three references myself -- whereas the recurring jokes section doesn't stand a chance. -- Bailey^(talk) 14:30, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I recall a few weeks ago Jon put the guest on the seat of heat and said something like "because now we're married to this bit" and since then it has not appeared at all. Has anyone else noticed this? 69.12.130.233 11:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone remember this, the one where Jon did a skit about receiving fan mail from "Smapdi, Age 8" (or maybe 7), a little black kid? Ran mayb around 1999-2001 or so. Tarc 01:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

read the entry, still dont know what the segment was about. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tehw1k1 (talk • contribs) 01:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The list has Mess'O'Potamia as a past segment - it actually was in yesterday's show. Ausir 18:32, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

there are a few times in which this article uses words like "recently," "soon," etc.

these might want to be removed and replaced with specific dates or relative times so as to preserve the longevity of the article —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.141.6.112 (talk) 19:10, 11 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I organized the past segments into whether they were during the Stewart or Kilborn eras of the show, in an effort to make the Past Segments section shorter. The only one that fell into both was Frank DeCaro's "Out at the Movies", but I put it in Stewart's because a majority of the segment's time on the show was during this era. Should we keep this arrangement? --Fernandobouregard 09:15, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does this segment fall under the heading of Indecision 2008 as it refers to the same event? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.81.49.31 (talk • contribs) 18:34, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a bit premature to list "Shits and Riggles" since it has not yet recurred. —Ben Brockert (42)08:57, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shits and Riggles is a segment that has occurred only once so far. It features Rob Riggle critiquing certain movies. In its first appearance, Riggle criticized Evan Almighty as being a very bad movie because of Steve Carell (who happened to be that night's guest).

Removed because if it’s only been once so far, it doesn’t qualify as “recurring”. —Random832 11:49, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

“

[God Stuff] began around 1996 and was discontinued when John Bloom left the show in 1998.

”

Based on thedailyshow.com, it looks more like God Stuff ran from 1999 to 2000:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/tagSearchResults.jhtml?term=generic_tag_god_stuff

Based on this, I'd also conclude that God Stuff isn't a Kilborn-era segment but rather a Stewart-era segment. TerraFrost 20:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

“

America to the Rescue, which highlights arms deals between the United States Government and the governments of Middle Eastern countries. The segment is introduced by a melange of powerful music, a brief segment of George W. Bush speaking, and computer-generated fighter jets. A self-compounding instance that compounded U.S. weapons deals linked to Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden, "flashback" segment introductions from the Persian Gulf War (featuring George H.W. Bush and the early 1980s Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (featuring Ronald Reagan).

”

anyone else find this weird? somebody must have got themselves a thesaurus and gone a little nuts — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.128.147.225 (talk • contribs) 02:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This segment has been included no less than twice, and has been referred to as 'apparently semi-regular' Should we include it under Other Titles for Mess'O'Potemia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.247.152.4 (talk) 17:08, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ever since the infamous jim cramer interview jon has sometimes said "roll 212" when referring to a certain video. also, he sometimes says "keep fucking that chicken." however, he does not say them very often but they have occurred more times than, say, the r. kelly impersonator. this article needs a lot of clean up IMO because right now based on the general layout of this article "go fuck yourself" should be added as well as the choir that goes with it. should the special impersonation segments be added too (glen beck and keith obermann)? what about the reoccurring mike huckabee debates? its too confusing what is determined relevant and what isnt. Ashburn247 (talk) 02:20, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yesterday's Daily Show (Dec 1, 2011) had a new segment "How the F#@k is it That Martha Stewart Went to Jail?" (displayed on the show in all UPPER CASE). I think it could become a recurring segment. --EarthFurst (talk) 19:30, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of The Daily Show recurring segments. 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:

• Replaced archive link http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:p1EcK1GwZIQJ:www.sptimes.com/News/100201/Floridian/Going_for_the_groan.shtml+new+york+times+%22Frank+DeCaro%22+%22the+daily+show%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=10 with https://web.archive.org/web/20160803123621/http://www.sptimes.com/News/100201/Floridian/Going_for_the_groan.shtml on http://www.sptimes.com/News/100201/Floridian/Going_for_the_groan.shtml

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) 17:15, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of The Daily Show recurring segments. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927234721/http://media.www.studlife.com/media/storage/paper337/news/2004/08/27/News/Film-Producer.Moore.May.Visit.Wu.In.October-706222.shtml to http://media.www.studlife.com/media/storage/paper337/news/2004/08/27/News/Film-Producer.Moore.May.Visit.Wu.In.October-706222.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071121185414/http://www.citypaper.net/articles/071300/ae.20q.shtml to http://citypaper.net/articles/071300/ae.20q.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060210035039/http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/media_player/play.jhtml?itemId=12756 to http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/media_player/play.jhtml?itemId=12756

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) 15:41, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]