Talk:List of The IT Crowd episodes

4x01

'Original air date' should be edited http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-it-crowd/articles/online-premiere —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.5.46.6 (talk) 18:23, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

2x06

Is Roy wearing an "8BitTheatre" t-shirt? (in the first scene) Or was I just imagining things?

Seasons or series?

Should it really be season 1 & season 2? In england we use 'series', and it is an english show. No-genius 20:28, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

This question should be answered for the main article first, and that uses the word series both as season and as show (and is in fact in category 2000s British television *series*), which I imagine could be confusing. I suppose it could be considered to be having strong national ties, but in that case the category name (bearing the name *British* television series) should be renamed as well... A nice pickle we've landed ourselves in, mr. Frodo. Any thoughts on this? -- MiG (talk) 20:55, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I use both. It doesn't matter. Unlike using trousers as opposed to pants. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.17.252.19 (talk) 14:02, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Maybe it should be neither "Season ..." nor "Series ..." but rather "Version ...", as per the DVDs. Ian Fieggen (talk) 23:40, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Jimmy Wales is American, thereby making Wikipedia American. Ergo, American terminology should be used. 'Series' is British IIRC, and 'Season' is American, so although it's a British series, I reckon that they should be labelled 'Season'. 92.8.143.194 (talk) 01:19, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Per WP:ENGVAR, series is what should be used. _TalkIslander 01:24, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Even so, Wikipedia is a worldwide project and is used and contributed to by English people too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deftera (talk • contribs) 20:21, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

As a Brit, I find I've started using the American terminology in daily speech, simply because it can be clearer when referring to multiple shows: "he appeared in the first season of both series" vs "he appeared in the first series, of both series". 86.25.122.156 (talk) 13:33, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Even though I think seasons makes more sense than series, since groups of episodes are typically separated by weather seasons (Episodes -> Seasons -> Series vs. Episodes -> Series -> Programme), we have to leave it with the UK method since it's a UK show.150.135.211.246 (talk) 22:02, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Too much info in the episode listings

Does anyone else think that there is too much plot information given for each episode? They should only really be a blurb, with the basic openings outlines given, they should not give away the whole episode. Series 3 Episode 4 is especially spoilerific. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Preposterone (talk • contribs) 18:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

If you didn't want spoilers, why would you come to a wikipedia page containing a list of episodes? 82.17.141.9 (talk) 21:41, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Emasculated?

The synopsis for the episode "Friendface" describes the character Moss asserting his masculinity at a party, then later, "...upon his arrival Roy’s assertion that he and Jen are in love is shot down by an emasculated Moss. After Moss delivers a stinging slap to Roy for "sassing his woman..."

Obviously the word "emasculated" is used wrongly here. The opposite meaning is implied by context. Tasty monster (=TS ) 11:21, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

FriendFace link?

Should the link to friendface.co.uk be removed? It's obviously a joke site directly referencing the show and not a serious webpage. 82.17.141.9 (talk) 21:43, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps change it to a reference or actually mention that the url was set up as part of the wider interactive market efforts they did for the series RoyalBlueStuey (talk) 15:51, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

We'd need a reliable source to support the claim that it was set up as part of the wider interactive market efforts. As it stands now the site has no content relevant to Friendface, it's just a generic firewall notice so it serves no purpose. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:00, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

"01189998819991197253" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect 01189998819991197253. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 8#01189998819991197253 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:14, 8 July 2021 (UTC)