Talk:Cheaters (American TV series)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Tommy Grand's back!

According to Tommy's official website as well as the "Cheaters" website, he's hosting "Cheaters Uncensored" on Pay-Per-View. --Crnk Mnky 18:44, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Mostly Dallas?

I am thinking that most of the cases profiled on Cheaters take place in Dallas, Texas. Can anyone confirm this?  Denelson83  04:40, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

It's true, but I'll leave you to look up the abundant evidence of that. --(Crnk Mnky)69.87.175.64 17:39, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

WP:OR

I reverted the sentence that stated that staged confrontations are unlikely because of the number of inquiries the agency receives per month. Although the statement is most likely true. It needs to be sourced. As it stands now, only the number is sourced, not the conclusion the sentence reaches. Ramsquire ^{(throw me a line)} 18:28, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

The article you cited said that the investigator gets about 2,000 inquiries a month, so they don't have to fake the show. Five years later, in February 2007, there was an article saying they received 14,000 more calls per month than they did five years ago. If you want to have the "this is fake" controversy stated in the page, then you have to show the other side of the story.

Additionally, there is not a single reality show out there that is 100% real. In most shows, there is always a producer in the background creating conflicts, telling those what to say, or even using a preset cast. The producer of Cheaters started his show 7 years ago. Since then, nationwide broadcasters and cable outlets have used reality programming. But it's never 100% real.Alibond

Step back, relax, assume good faith, and understand my edit is based solely on WP:OR. I am not presenting nor taking any side in any argument about this show. I removed an edit that said in effect that the show is probably not fake because of the number of inquiry it receives. I kept in the numbers because the article used did support the numbers in the sentence, but the article did not make any conclusion about whether the show is faked or not based on those numbers. So for any of us to make that conclusion based on the numbers is synthesis/original research, which is not allowed. In addition, I left in the objection by the show producer so both sides are presented and sourced. Ramsquire ^{(throw me a line)} 22:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:42450 M.jpg

Image:42450 M.jpg 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 insure 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) 04:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Stabbing

Didnt the host get stabbed by an some angry cheater guy on a boat during an episode? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.23.246.200 (talk) 18:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

$16 Million Settlement?

The history section says Tommy left the show and won a $16 million settlement from Bobby Goldstein. I know Tommy left, but anyone know where this $16 million information came from? I can't find anything online to verify this claim.Pong ae (talk) 16:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Without a reference it should be deleted. PeetMoss (talk) 20:54, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. I'm just interested in where this information came from and the user who added it. I'm sort of new at this and am not the best at interpreting the information on here :)Pong ae (talk) 02:20, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

While adding the infobox to the article, I attempted to cite unsourced facts, and I too couldn't find any info on this online. Not saying it's not true, I just couldn't find anything online about it. I find it interesting that Tommy got a huge settlement yet still works for the company. I went ahead and tagged it, but I will remove it if it's not sourced soon. Pinkadelica 06:03, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Hasn't been sourced, so I'm deleting it. --Otterfan (talk) 03:14, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Source for stabbing

Sources listed offer no independent corroboration of the stabbing. They seem to take the video and statements of Joey Greco at face value, when it seems probable, to me at least, the event was staged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.114.72.190 (talk) 05:05, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Unclear Reference

An episode of George Lopez called "George Thinks Vic's Fiancee is Lion About Being a Cheetah" in which George hires the cheaters crew to spy on Vic's young fiancee. It is revealed, not only she was cheating on him, but Benny was found by cheaters several times, resulting in her threatening them to leave her alone.

First of all, this sentence is gramatically nonsensical. Second, who is Benny? Third, the last part of this makes no sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.150.73.57 (talk) 21:29, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Merge

I'll soon be merging Cheaters Detective Agency with this article, as it's obvious that the "detective agency" wouldn't have notability without the show and therefore doesn't deserve its own article. -- Mikeblas 01:41, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

The Cheaters Detective Agency is notable in itself, there are about 75 offices across the country. They use the brand name for support, but it's still a seperate entity.

As an example, John E. Potter would not have notability if it wasn't for his position as United States Postmaster General. However, he is notable enough for his own article. 75.83.109.174 16:40, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the merger. I would think your average person would really be surprised to see this firm mentioned on it's own merit in an encyclopedia. After all, how many firms are there in the world that have more then 75 affiliates selling their service or their products under a brand name they license out? I also don't see how one could compare what they do with the responsibilities assumed by the Postmaster General. PeetMoss

Support the merge; a section at Cheaters will cover the subject sufficiently.- Gilliam 23:23, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Support the merge; there is little notability for the agency other than its role in the television show. Besides, a "B" rate television show on its own is barely of encyclopedic quality anyway--do we really need two separate articles? TeamZissou 18:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I feel like this merger was not done well. There is only a small mention of Cheaters Detective Agency. When the merger was done, the original article was CUT to just one sentence before the merge, in effect, purging information. It ended up being more of a DELETE than a MERGE. --Flyryan (talk) 07:45, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Cheaters Detective Agency, the company the article was about, is now defunct. PeetMoss (talk) 13:32, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Bizarre Moments

Outside of the expansion of the stabbing story, I am not sure that this section has encyclopedic merit. But regardless of that, I have read the last sentence in the section three or four times and have no idea what is being explained, nor even how many people are involved (a girlfriend, his [sic?] man, her fiance/companion, another (?) fiance, a groom, and an ex-fiance?). Can someone with knowledge of the story please, at the very least, rewrite this so it is clear? "On the Season 10 premiere, a girlfriend suspected his man of cheating on her, but as further evidence reveals, he's been with her fiance (the companion). The Cheaters crew and the complaintant storm in on an outdoor wedding, and while the girlfriend was wanting answers, his fiance bashes the groom and demands that he get away from her. As an end result, his girlfriend broke up with him and his ex-fiance called off the wedding." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.35.35.34 (talk) 19:12, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Cheaters. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071213092329/http://www.wcnc.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/111006dnwescheaters.33caed2.html to http://www.wcnc.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/111006dnwescheaters.33caed2.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:27, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Real or fake?

Is the footage shown in the show really taking place or is it just played by actors to look real? I only saw two episodes and wondered in some situations how they placed the camera in rooms they usually don't have access to. Regards from Austria.

I recall quite a bit of controversy regarding the whole stabbing incident myself. Regretabbly I haven't been able to turn up anything of note. I only wish the perpertrator had been better with the knife. In regards to the filiming in Dallas, this is true. I've never seen an episode outside of the Dallas metroplex. Also, at the end of the show they give contact information for viewers who think they may have a cheating spouse, the address listed is (ironically) 4516 Lovers Lane in Dallas 68.203.127.188 19:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

• There have been a few episodes shot in NYC.

My guess: it's fake. I don't really know that, but i guess if you're filming somebody without his knowledge, you'd have to ask for permission to broadcast. And i don't really think anyone caught cheating would want it on TV. - There's 2 links in the wikipedia-article (Controversy) regards, --HerbSolo 10:31, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Yea i rekon too. because in 1 episode a lady gave birth on the set just when he came up to his bf for cheating. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.7.123.144 (talk) 12:06, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

If you see fottage inside a structure it is either a public place or owned by someone who gave their permission, usually the person being cheated on. It is absolutely legal to film someone outside or in a public place. You only have the right to privacy in a place where you could reasonably expect privacy, such as inside your own home or a restroom. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.252.30.243 (talk) 07:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

However I do want to point out there have been episodes where the crew has entered the apartment or home of an individual that requested the crew leave after stating it was a private residence that they owned without the complaintant. When the crew was attacked with the paintball gun (and even when the host was stabbed) the crew can not press charges as they were trespassing. While what they do may be a service, if they enter a private residence, they should expect to be shot or harmed and I see no reason that they would expect otherwise. I often wonder how many times a gun has been pulled on them. I mean a group of men enter a man's house and burst into his bedroom while he is with a loved one, all the guys are in black with tazers. What do they expect to have happen? (On a side note, it would be very funny if the TV show COPS happened to be filming the arrest of the CHEATERS crew..that would be the best!) --24.117.130.146 (talk) 04:22, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

fake as hell, IMO - I saw one where a pissed hillbilly drove his truck off of a dock, and they just so happened to have a helicopter shooting that day.... riiiight. I assume its like Springer, where people get paid to do stupid things and stupid people believe its real... 208.48.150.6 (talk) 09:52, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd vote for "embellished" as opposed to fake. The article does actually bring up an instance were people claimed they were paid off by the show to do certain things. Perhaps some more info in this regard would help. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 14:29, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I know this doesn't really help the article, but for anyone wondering, the show features both real and staged confrontations. I've had two coworkers that were actors on the show, but occasionally they do investigate real claims.Scyclical (talk) 19:55, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

What makes me (more than) suspicious is how the suspects are apparently in the start of the relationship. I suspect that infidelity start out much like we see on Cheaters, but that after a while it becomes a mere text-me-for-bootycall-but-keep-it-low-profile thing, but which would make for poor TV drama. This is consistently the reverse of what we are seeing on the show. It is too much of a coincidence that all these "suspects" are romantisizing for days before having sex. The premise of the show is that these infidelities have been going on for some time finally arousing enough suspicion with the spouse to write to the show, so you'd expect the cheaters to be months and years into their flings. Not only don't I think that the interaction between the two would be vastly different, but if they had been going to restaurants, movies, parks, clubs etc so blatantly obvious as a couple, they would have been spotted by someone.(84.211.138.201 (talk) 05:20, 31 March 2016 (UTC))

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cheaters. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20080509124824/http://www.g4tv.com/cheaters/index.html to http://www.g4tv.com/cheaters/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:05, 1 April 2016 (UTC)