Talk:Late Night with Conan O'Brien

Trivia

I plan to delete the remaining trivia bits - the CST NYE countdown, and the Stoned award. Since these are actual notable qualities of Late Night, I'm giving editors the opportunity to put them in a proper place in the article if possible, before I delete them and the trivia section itself. TheHYPO 16:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Conan's 1/2/08 mid writers strike return

Whoever is adding that Conan, Leno, and Kimmel returned only came back because of the ratings competition between themselves and Letterman and Ferguson should know that the real reason they came back was that their entire non-writing staff (lighting people, sound and camera people, temps, interns, and all the behind the scenes people) would have been fired if they didn't come back with new episodes. - 99.237.9.80 (talk) 00:38, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I see that you know a pretty good deal of info on this subject, and by contributing, you are certainly improving this article. However, i would ask you that if you decide to revert to older versions or change something important in the article to give a reason for such a change.

AuaWise -Talk- 16:09, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

It seems to be back to repeats this week. What gives? Are they skipping on more live shows? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.90.113.66 (talk) 04:32, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, what gives? Its been a bunch of reruns since monday. Are they having trouble booking guests or something?--124.106.234.224 (talk) 15:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

It's called vacation, people. Conan does this every once in a while to give him and his staff a break. This is likely not strike related. - 99.237.9.80 (talk) 17:46, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

For the week of 3/3/2008 is Conan filming on location or just a vacation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matt on Wiki (talk • contribs) 02:37, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Logo Image

Anyone else think the title card should be replaced with the logo? 40px--Tkgd2007 (talk) 03:03, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Agree.Λua∫Wise ^(talk) 09:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Agree --70.75.43.62 (talk) 06:14, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Sure - 99.237.9.80 (talk) 17:47, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. (ApJ (talk) 05:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC))

Awesome! It's up there, thanks for agreeing! Tkgd2007 (talk) 05:40, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

New reference?

Reference 3 no longer links to the article from which the info was pulled (which, by the looks of it, is quite a bit). Does that mean that we have to find new references? TruPhan (talk) 01:04, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Beef with Comedy Central's Jon Stewart and Colbert over ownership of Mike Huckabee?

We should somehow mention this in the article. In The Colbert Report, Stephen Colbert claimed Mike Huckabee's success as caused by "the Colbert Bump". Following this, O'Brian retaliated by claiming Huckabee by showing how he had given Colbert a "bump" on his show, which would have caused his rise to fame and being able to later give Huckabee the forementioned Colbert Bump. Later, Stewart claimed Huckabee since he had given O'Brian a bump on his previous show long before Conan got his current fame. There has been no official response from Huckabee himself so far. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.145.112.69 (talk) 19:27, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

If nothing of it has been added so far, it should be. (ApJ (talk) 05:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC))

wait for it to be over with, after its done we should defiantly add it to to the memorable moments section. Gailim (talk) 05:15, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Good point, it's continuing on Late Night tonight, so we need to wait for what happens anyway. (ApJ (talk) 05:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC))

OMG! Further escalation! They beat each other up over it! All three (Colbert, Stewart and O'Brian) appeared in all three shows, taunting after which they started an actual brawl! It was even topped off by a statement from the actual Mike Huckabee himself, explaning that "this great nation" made him, not "these three idiots" :D For the video (as a reference/source), see: [[1]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.145.112.69 (talk) 11:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Late Night Conan Logo.svg

Image:Late Night Conan Logo.svg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:25, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Location of audition

The location of the audition has been added, it was on the set of Jay Leno's "The Tonight Show". Bcadwal (talk) 02:45, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Radiohead

Radiohead has been added as the first band to play on the show. Bcadwal (talk) 02:48, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

First Crowd

A tidbit about the first crowd to ever see the show has been added in the section about the first show. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bcadwal (talk • contribs) 02:53, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

First "Tonight Show:

Material has been added in speculation of what the first show as "The Tonight Show" will be. Bcadwal (talk) 00:54, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

• Speculation is not appropriate for Wikipedia as it is original research. Also, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Dp76764 (talk) 00:58, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Is/Was

Consistent with other "former" TV shows, the introduction sentence should continue to read "is" even though the show is no longer in production. —Fumo7887 (talk • contribs) 06:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

A quick look at the Late Night with David Letterman and The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson articles shows was instead of is in both cases. However, I'm not willing to get into an edit war over it. Sesu Prime (talk) 07:09, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I noticed an all-out edit war has already started! But I'm taking no part in it, except to say that I support the usage of "was" in the intro. Would this edit war have started had I not made the first edit? Probably. --Sesu Prime (talk) 07:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. In most other articles about a television show no longer in production, the word was is used. Because of this, most people expect the use of was instead of is.Noz92 (talk) 04:39, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, well, apparently this is inconsistent. I know there was an issue like this on another article (although I can't remember which and therefore can't find the Talk page it was discussed on). But shows such as The West Wing, Friends, Cheers and many others still use "is" despite being out of production, some for a long time. Should this be considered not relevant for talk shows since, for the most part, they air the same day they are taped? —Fumo7887 (talk • contribs) 22:35, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Maybe old scripted TV shows should use present-tense, but retired talk-shows and news programs should definitely be in the past-tense. I'm not sure why this difference is, but it just seems to fit. What I am sure of is that Late Night with Conan O'Brien isn't a great show, it was a great show. --Sesu Prime (talk) 08:23, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Reverted to "is", per the Wikipedia convention. (Shows using "was" are the ones out of line with the standard practise.) While it may not be in production, it still "exists" as a creative work - especially in the age of DVD and electronic delivery systems. The other two have also been repaired, one by me and one independently of this discussion. --Ckatz^chat_spy 09:58, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. The show is and will always be "an American late-night talk show hosted by Conan O'Brien". This is no different than how we refer to characters from literature that are no longer in production (John Doe is a character in Jane Author's book Really Good Book).The show still exists and is still viewed (whether in reruns, DVDs, DVRS, etc); ceasing production doesn't mean the show ceases to exist. --auburnpilot talk 14:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

If someone would post the link to the Wikipedia guideline page stating the accepted method (whether it be to use past- or present-tense), that will (hopefully) solve this dispute. By the way, everyone should STOP changing the was/is wording until we reach some sort of consensus. --Sesu Prime (talk) 22:22, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

With respect to the changes, the consensus version is "is" - so we have to keep repairing it. Unfortunately, many of the "was" changes occur when new editors come in and (unknowingly) change it to "was. It is a constant issue across the television articles, even with the addition of edit comments explaining why. --Ckatz^chat_spy 22:57, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I would still like to see the Wikipedia guideline page that states that is (as opposed to was) is the proper and accepted method to describe retired television shows. I tried to locate the guideline page describing the accepted method on my own, but I am still pretty new to Wikipedia, so I had difficulty when looking for it. If this page is found and its wikilink is posted here on the talk page, and the hidden note in the article (the one on both sides of the is/was) were to point to the guideline page, the volume of is/was edits could decrease significantly. -Sesu Prime (talk) 23:51, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I concur with Sesu Prime. "Wikipedia consensus" is wrong. The appropriate wording is "was". A talk show is not the same as The West Wing, Friends or Cheers, as those programs live on in syndication and reruns, while a talk show does not. The show DOES "cease to exist". Conan is not hosting a late-night talk show by this name. He WAS, but he IS NOT now. Jimmy Fallon IS (by a slightly different name. Chalk it up to "error of the consensus" (aka Borg). Herb Riede (talk) 21:54, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Coming in and claiming there is a "concensus" (when there clearly is not) and referring to a vague "wikipedia convention" that may or may not exist outside of Ckatz head, is unproductive. The argument that the show continues to "exist" due to DVDs and reruns makes little sense, considering DVDs are not released for long running late night talk shows. Nor are there reruns of Conan on tv. Rizla (talk) 01:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Creative works exist, until destroyed or otherwise removed from existence. Unless there is proof that NBC has erased every copy of every episode of the series, it still exists, can still be viewed, and can still be aired. (By the way, Rizla, the convention is under the Television project style guideline, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/Style_guidelines#Lead_paragraphs. You might wish to give that a read, instead of making insulting comments and announcing "i dont care what your conventions are".) --Ckatz^chat_spy 02:13, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Now, was that really so hard, wikipedia master? I'm sorry to take a few minutes away from your busy schedule. Rizla (talk) 02:57, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Wow Rizla, that was uncalled for. Anyway, thanks for posting the guideline link Ckatz; you've changed my mind about the big is/was debate. -sesuPRIME ^{talk • contribs} 03:58, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Changing to was will distinguish it from show that are still current, and is used on most other articles and deceased people. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 23:34, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Eleventyseven Reference

Not sure this is notable, in fact, I'm kinda sure it's not but I'll post it here on the talk page anyways. http://www.lyricstime.com/eleventyseven-conan-lyrics.html The band makes an entire song in reference to the (now dissolved) show. Possibly deserves a sentence or reference (though the band does make other pop culture references). 74.5.105.31 (talk) 05:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Seems like trivia to me. Unless a reliable 3rd party makes a comment or reports on it, this isn't something that deserves a mention. DP76764 (Talk) 15:45, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Late Night

Shouldn't an overview article, say Late Night (NBC) be created to overview the three incarnations, like exists for The Tonight Show ? 70.29.208.129 (talk) 04:01, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Comedy Central reruns

I edited this article [2] and added: For a short time starting in September 2002, Comedy Central showed the previous night's episode of Late Night at 7 PM. but then someone immediately removed it. It didn't even get a [citation needed]. Well, anyway, it happened. --216.254.228.94 (talk) 03:43, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Because the information you added was unsourced, the editor removed it. You can re-add it if you have a reliable source. -sesuPRIME 04:04, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I thought that was the point of Template:Citation needed. Shouldn't have been immediately removed. --216.254.228.94 (talk) 19:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

It depends on the editor and the nature of the unsourced information. I usually remove unsourced information on sight rather than using the {{fact}} tags. -sesuPRIME 00:57, 2 August 2009 (UTC)