231:
294:
451:
398:
188:
284:
263:
127:
598:
Roulette by its very nature has at least one green zero on it. So its a roulette 'type' wheel, but definately not a roulette wheel. Oh and its the most pointless game show ever. Why not just get them to toss a coin ten times, show would cost far less, be on the screens for less time, and possibly
467:
I've restored the line regarding the cost of the show. Rather than remove it in future, could you provide a reference to show that it isn't the most expensive show (or that it didn't cost £15m) as it would be better changed to along the lines of "initial press reports stated that the show was the
529:
I've never seen an episode, but from the article I get the impression that the contestants win or lose based on pure blind chance, one round at a time. They exert absolutely no skill for the entire game, and have no control over their fate whatsoever except for choosing red or black.
385:
381:
468:
most expensive game show ever made, costing around £15m, but was this claim was later disproven..." - obviously not those words because they're rubbish, but you get the idea.
544:
368:
506:
Until a source disputes the first reports on budget, and is added, it should remain. Btw IP, this is a talk page for improving the article, not a forum.
637:
362:
106:
94:
585:
567:
518:
162:. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to
110:
90:
102:
443:
138:
576:? Anyone in academia done a mathematical treatment of the odds yet? Would be informative - unless its too close to original research.
647:
642:
627:
600:
316:
632:
608:
344:
320:
540:
491:
195:
548:
499:
204:
307:
268:
208:
159:
622:
479:
78:
37:
354:
67:
26:
211:. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about
604:
593:
216:
484:
This is one of the worst TV shows in history... a budget like that and they made absolute tripe.
581:
495:
169:
164:
413:
238:
536:
524:
487:
462:
533:
Is this correct? If not then the article needs a rewrite to explain what the players do.
8:
98:
53:
577:
555:
That is correct, it is pure chance. Their luck just has to hold out ten times in a row.
474:
149:
74:
33:
397:
299:
21:
158:
An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the
418:
556:
507:
312:
315:. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can
434:
252:
212:
200:
616:
469:
144:
428:
311:, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Knowledge articles about
293:
408:
58:
283:
262:
168:, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a
56:
to this revision, which may differ significantly from the
289:
367:This article has not yet received a rating on the
614:
319:. To improve this article, please refer to the
237:This article is of interest to the following
251:template instead of this project banner. See
66:Revision as of 20:25, 12 September 2011 by
386:Template:WikiProject Television Game Shows
230:
228:
439:, the most expensive game show ever made?
421:). The text of the entry was as follows:
47:
137:is currently a Theatre, film and drama
65:
14:
638:Unknown-importance television articles
615:
442:A record of the entry may be seen at
247:Please add the quality rating to the
172:should be left to the first reviewer.
44:
25:
444:Knowledge:Recent additions/2011/July
392:
305:This article is within the scope of
224:
182:
121:
17:
119:
88:
449:
120:
659:
450:
382:Template:British TV shows project
154:at 20:25, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
52:. The present address (URL) is a
396:
329:Knowledge:WikiProject Television
292:
282:
261:
229:
186:
125:
648:Knowledge Did you know articles
643:WikiProject Television articles
628:Good article nominees on review
349:This article has been rated as
332:Template:WikiProject Television
586:20:33, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
475:
470:
150:
145:
13:
1:
609:09:54, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
568:12:37, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
549:12:33, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
519:20:28, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
500:20:03, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
199:for general discussion about
249:{{WikiProject banner shell}}
7:
633:B-Class television articles
480:11:33, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
24:of this page, as edited by
10:
664:
369:project's importance scale
366:
348:
277:
245:
417:column on 11 July 2011 (
407:appeared on Knowledge's
45:20:25, 12 September 2011
431:conceived the idea for
455:
308:WikiProject Television
623:Good article nominees
453:
323:for the type of work.
160:good article criteria
203:. Any such comments
139:good article nominee
599:more entertaining.
335:television articles
317:join the discussion
313:television programs
95:← Previous revision
456:
355:content assessment
198:
594:Its not Roulette!
539:comment added by
490:comment added by
460:
459:
391:
390:
379:
378:
375:
374:
300:Television portal
223:
222:
194:
181:
180:
155:
655:
572:Less skill than
564:
562:
551:
515:
513:
502:
477:
472:
452:
400:
393:
337:
336:
333:
330:
327:
321:style guidelines
302:
297:
296:
286:
279:
278:
273:
265:
258:
257:
250:
234:
233:
232:
225:
190:
189:
183:
152:
147:
142:
129:
128:
122:
107:Newer revision →
85:
82:
61:
59:current revision
51:
50:
46:
42:
41:
663:
662:
658:
657:
656:
654:
653:
652:
613:
612:
601:212.183.128.104
596:
574:Deal or no Deal
560:
558:
534:
527:
511:
509:
485:
465:
353:on Knowledge's
334:
331:
328:
325:
324:
298:
291:
271:
256:
248:
187:
177:
165:the review page
126:
118:
117:
116:
115:
114:
99:Latest revision
87:
86:
83:
72:
70:
57:
48:
31:
29:
12:
11:
5:
661:
651:
650:
645:
640:
635:
630:
625:
595:
592:
591:
590:
589:
588:
526:
523:
522:
521:
464:
461:
458:
457:
447:
441:
440:
401:
389:
388:
377:
376:
373:
372:
365:
359:
358:
347:
341:
340:
338:
304:
303:
287:
275:
274:
266:
246:
243:
242:
235:
221:
220:
217:Reference desk
205:may be removed
191:
179:
178:
175:
132:
130:
68:
54:permanent link
27:
16:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
660:
649:
646:
644:
641:
639:
636:
634:
631:
629:
626:
624:
621:
620:
618:
611:
610:
606:
602:
587:
583:
579:
578:GraemeLeggett
575:
571:
570:
569:
566:
565:
554:
553:
552:
550:
546:
542:
541:95.148.161.14
538:
531:
520:
517:
516:
505:
504:
503:
501:
497:
493:
492:81.105.137.31
489:
482:
481:
478:
473:
448:
445:
438:
437:
436:
435:Red or Black?
430:
426:
423:
422:
420:
416:
415:
410:
406:
405:Red or Black?
402:
399:
395:
394:
387:
384:
383:
370:
364:
361:
360:
356:
352:
346:
343:
342:
339:
322:
318:
314:
310:
309:
301:
295:
290:
288:
285:
281:
280:
276:
270:
267:
264:
260:
259:
254:
244:
240:
236:
227:
226:
218:
214:
213:Red or Black?
210:
206:
202:
201:Red or Black?
197:
193:This page is
192:
185:
184:
176:
173:
171:
167:
166:
161:
156:
153:
148:
143:Nominated by
140:
136:
135:Red or Black?
131:
124:
123:
112:
108:
104:
100:
96:
92:
80:
76:
71:
64:
63:
60:
55:
39:
35:
30:
23:
597:
573:
557:
535:— Preceding
532:
528:
525:Pure chance?
508:
486:— Preceding
483:
466:
463:£15m removal
433:
432:
429:Simon Cowell
425:Did you know
424:
414:Did you know
412:
404:
403:A fact from
380:
350:
306:
255:for details.
239:WikiProjects
174:
170:good article
163:
157:
134:
133:
22:old revision
19:
18:
419:check views
196:not a forum
20:This is an
617:Categories
326:Television
269:Television
209:refactored
454:Knowledge
427:... that
409:Main Page
537:unsigned
488:unsigned
471:Miyagawa
146:Miyagawa
79:contribs
69:Miyagawa
38:contribs
28:Miyagawa
411:in the
351:B-class
272:B‑class
253:WP:PIQA
215:at the
476:(talk)
357:scale.
151:(talk)
84:(GAN.)
49:(GAN.)
605:talk
582:talk
559:Rain
545:talk
510:Rain
496:talk
111:diff
105:) |
103:diff
91:diff
75:talk
34:talk
563:One
561:the
514:One
512:the
363:???
207:or
43:at
619::
607:)
584:)
547:)
498:)
141:.
97:|
93:)
77:|
36:|
603:(
580:(
543:(
494:(
446:.
371:.
345:B
241::
219:.
113:)
109:(
101:(
89:(
81:)
73:(
62:.
40:)
32:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
