Talk:It's That Man Again

Catchphrase section update

Hi there folks and folkesses. After saving this comment, I'll be updating the catchphrase section of this article, by combining the material I erroneously placed into the Tommy Handley article. I for some reason I didn't spot the ITMA link, or I'd have worked the updates into the existing list here. Thanks to Rothorpe (talk) for bringing it to my attention. No worries. The groundwork is not lost, and it's essentially a copy-edit exercise now. Wotnow (talk) 02:07, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

After this edit, I will save the catchphrase section update. I did not find an ITMA reference for the catchphrase: "I am as happy as a sandbag". This appears to be the title of a musical ('Happy as a sandbag'), rather than a catchphrase from ITMA, the catchphrases of which are fairly well documented - for the very reason that they became catchphrases. "Happy as a sandbag" may be a catchphrase in its own right, but it does not appear to have originated from ITMA. I have therefore deleted it.

If a reliable citation is found by anyone, please feel free to add it back. Conversely, if you aren't too good with citations, just chuck the weblink here, and I'll format it. Beyond a reliable citation, the only other way to check whether this was ever an ITMA catchphrase is to listen to some of the recordings, which can be found. Again, if anyone happens to do this, please state the title/date of the recording, and I'll track it down. Wotnow (talk) 03:51, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Re "happy as a sandbag": this is a malapropistic rendition of the traditional simile 'happy as a sandboy' and as such it would have been rendered by the character Signor So-so as played by Dino Galvani. It would be a one-off and therefore would not qualify as a catchphrase; the custom was to get at least one such malapropism in per episode. It will undoubtedly show up in the surviving scripts but as a one-off, searching for it would be a 'needle in a haystack' job! Gamelyn Chase (talk) 01:48, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

I've finally got around to crediting Diana Morrison as the first person to pronounce the ejaculation ‘d’oh!’ in any broadcast sound medium, notwithstanding the much vaunted 'claiming' of it by The Simpsons some 43 years later. The actual ‘D’oh!’ page is top heavy. On the available evidence the term is clearly generic; the referencing of the subject ‘The Simpsons’ belongs later in the narrative. Gamelyn Chase (talk) 11:26, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Origin of name

The Oxford DNB article about Herbert Gunn says he joined the Daily Express in 1936 in Manchester, and "he later transferred to London as assistant editor and then between 1943 and 1944 was managing editor of the Daily Express. It was there that he created the headline referring to Hitler as ‘It's that man again’, which afterwards became the title for Tommy Handley's long-running radio show ITMA". But It's That Man Again started on the National Programme of BBC Radio at 8.15 PM on 12 July 1939. The title must have decided before that.

I've had a look and found on the top of page 19 of the Daily Express for 29 April 1939 is a banner "FORGET THAT MAN HITLER: Here's all you want to known about today's Cup Final". But note that 'that man' still had to be named. The only direct use of the phrase comes in the Jonah Barrington column on 15 May 1939 (page 19) at the end of an article about the prospect of television opening in the Midlands:

But the Treasury have not yet said yes. "You can have your £250,000," they replied, "just as soon as the international situation settles down a little. But at the moment, well . . ."

In fact, it's That Man again . . .

Could this be the origin? Sam Blacketer (talk) 21:32, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Scratch that, found it on 2 May. Front page. Sam Blacketer (talk) 21:37, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

"trans-jurisdictional trademark"

This article included a claim that Fox had made an application for a "trans-jurisdictional sound trademark" covering "D'Oh", but that this trademark is invalid because of the previous use of "D'Oh" in ITMA. This is incorrect:

1) All registered trademarks are jurisdictional. The US trademark linked to in the piece covers only the US, any corresponding European Community trademark would only cover Europe etc. There are mechanisms (e.g., the Madrid protocol) which allow you to essentially make an application to many countries through a single initial application, but all that is happening here is that WIPO acts as a clearing office, and that the initial application then results in multiple trademark applications in multiple jurisdictions each being handled separately. There is no such thing as a "trans-jurisdictional trademark".

2) There is no concept of prior art in trademarks. You can make an application for a trademark that has been used before by others. ITMA's prior use of "D'Oh" therefore has no relevance to a registration of "D'Oh" by another. The only case in which this would be relevant is if you are trying to argue that the phrase is in common use in the relevant class ("Entertainment services in the nature of an animated television series" - BTW, the trademark only covers activities in this area), something that no-one would argue, and that ITMA was not an example of.

Finally, this entire section appears to be be original research (WP:NOR) and should be removed for that reason.FOARP (talk) 06:02, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

EDIT: I see the same argument (ITMA 'invented' D'oh, so Fox's trademark is not valid) has already been made at D'oh!, and was rejected. FOARP (talk) 05:23, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Since this involves a sound trademark the only ‘research’ was the necessary sourcing of the controverting ITMA sound files, something not beyond the wit of a maladjusted amoeba. As to the necessary praecognita, it was not necessary for me to do any research whatsoever on aspects of ITMA; I was there.

Other than a residuary reference and link, I voluntarily transferred the topic out to ITMA because it otherwise seemed to be susceptible to the depredations of chagrined Simpsons’ aficionados. I have reinstated the deleted material with augments that might satisfy your pulsating circumspection. You were, and are, entirely free to make linear edits for any syntactical nuances you might have issue with. What you are not free to do is diminish the sum total of knowledge on any topic and thereby frustrate the purpose and intent of Wikipedia. Gamelyn Chase (talk) 03:24, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

It would appear that your real argument is about the origin of D'oh, and that this argument is therefore the same one you've had over at D'oh. I apply the same reasoning they did. This is original research, there is no credible source for a controversy involving ITMA over Fox's sound trademark. Even from a point of view of trademark law, there is no issue here since trademark law has no concept of prior art. You try to counter this by saying "I was there", but this is the very essence of original research. EDIT: WP:SOAPBOX is also worth mentioning here, as is WP:POVFORK.

Finally, please refrain from using insulting language and editing other users comments. FOARP (talk) 08:21, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

The febrile editing tells its own story. Since the objective here is to re-discover and fix for posterity the role of Diana Morrison in the history of this ‘catchphrase’ I have retreated to an earlier position short of the apparent sticking point. The outline of the character and the retrievable sound file links are reinstated and if the page (as at 03:54, 29/10/2013) remains unmolested, that objective will have been achieved. Gamelyn Chase (talk) 04:04, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

What's with the photo?

Resolved, and article is protected

Why is there a photo of somebody's dick illustrating this article? 2603:6010:3144:B300:1171:A78D:22A8:24E (talk) 05:45, 12 March 2023 (UTC) Someone has removed it. 2A00:23C8:8999:7901:9015:D7E9:39A0:F12E (talk) 05:50, 12 March 2023 (UTC) @2A00:23C8:8999:7901:9015:D7E9:39A0:F12E it's still there 2A02:8440:3308:80AC:6C61:B0FF:FEE0:AFAD (talk) 05:57, 12 March 2023 (UTC) @2603:6010:3144:B300:1171:A78D:22A8:24E There is a pornographic photo of a man's penis that's used to advertise this article. Whilst I see the amusement potential, it's clearly not just an illustration as it appears with what also looks like a woman's hand and other limbs in the background. It's an assault to push porn onto people without their consent. I don't want to see anyone's genitalia without being invited first. If this isn't removed it's damadging WIKIPEDIA'S open source content aims 2A02:8440:3308:80AC:6C61:B0FF:FEE0:AFAD (talk) 05:57, 12 March 2023 (UTC) @2603:6010:3144:B300:1171:A78D:22A8:24E I noticed that as well. WTF 2600:1012:B1CE:48D9:D50E:180F:4A16:779C (talk) 06:02, 12 March 2023 (UTC) The incorrect (pornographic) photo appears in the Explore section and is still there. Johnnybna (talk) 06:21, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Performers

Thanks to Tim riley and any other editors who have worked on this. I've looked at the article before as a source of catchphrases like "After you, Claude" and "It's being so cheerful..." but read it again with interest.

A point for your consideration though. The section which lists performers doesn't link to them via their name in the first column. Instead, you have to go to the rightmost column where it typically links after saying "Further information" (which I see is done with {{more}}). This seemed a bit clumsy and inconsistent as sometime you have basic information about the performer in the notes box and sometimes you don't. And getting to the notes column was awkward in a mobile portrait view.

It might also be nice to have thumbnail images of performers as these can be quite evocative, e.g. Sam Costa right). ITMA is before my time but I recognise Costa's face quite well from his later work on radio and TV.

Andrew🐉(talk) 09:43, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

• The Costa image was taken out at FAC as the licence is too unclear to pass the threshold. - SchroCat (talk) 09:45, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Overseas broadcasts

Great article - congratulations to all involved. I'm curious to know about overseas broadcasts of ITMA. My grandparents were in British North Borneo (now the Malaysian state of Sabah) before and after WW2, and listened to ITMA. Would this have been on the World Service? I have letters from my grandmother to my mother mentioning ITMA, in 1947 being broadcast by the BBC and in 1949 by an Australian broadcasting station. I also wonder what Australians and others made of it. 09:52, 12 March 2023 (UTC) Jasper33 (talk) 09:52, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

• That would have been on the BBC Far Eastern Station, I reckon -- a shortwave relay station in Singapore. The World Service name started in 1965. Andrew🐉(talk) 00:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 March 2023

Please change "... BBC radio comedy programme which ran for twelve series from 1939 to 1949." to "... radio comedy programme which ran by BBC for twelve series from 1939 to 1949." Changing the aforementioned part to "... radio comedy programme which ran on [insert the names of the radio stations that aired it] for twelve series from 1939 to 1949." is also fine. Mat333o (talk) 12:36, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. As far as I can tell, "BBC radio comedy" is both accurate and easily attributable. M.Bitton (talk) 13:17, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Reverts

@SchroCat: Having twice been reverted with edits that clearly improve the article, I think "come, now" is the appropriate response to your gate-keeping. What I added from the ODNB is proportionate, I'd say. Charles Matthews (talk) 09:53, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Not proportionate, not correct and not improvements. Aside from the fact it's too much fluff for an article about the radio show and better suited to the article on the individual (as I said in my edit summary), why on earth did you describe him as a singer? Took doesn't do so, so why did you? - SchroCat (talk) 09:59, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

To quote the ODNB at length:

He became a professional singer in 1916 in a touring company of the operetta The Maid of the Mountains. In 1917 he was called up and he served in the Royal Naval Air Service, where his talents were seized upon and he joined a concert party.

After the war Handley undertook a series of short-term touring engagements, including a number for which Jack Hylton (who became a lifelong friend), was the musical director. He eventually devised and starred in a music-hall sketch, The Disorderly Room, a skit on army life. This proved to be a great success and remained in his repertory from 1921 to 1941. [1]

Your version "The comedian Tommy Handley started as in music hall before becoming a regular feature on BBC radio from 1924" seems not to be grammatical or factually correct. Charles Matthews (talk) 10:10, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

How is he described by the same ONDB in the opening line? Our opening sentence is both grammatically and factually correct, but nice try. - SchroCat (talk) 10:16, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Not going very well, is it? I'm not often reverted, but when I am, I make a point of finding out why. The version "Tommy Handley was a music hall comedian before becoming a regular feature on BBC radio from 1924" would be better than what is there now. I commend it. Charles Matthews (talk) 10:49, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

It is clearer as it is (he was a comedian both before and after featuring on the wireless) and, in my view, reads better too. Tim riley talk 10:57, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Handley was not a stand-up comedian by background, which people might assume, and was a professional singer who got into sketch comedy. "Comedian" is pretty ambiguous. ODNB of him in the 1920s has "a mainstay of BBC variety programmes, both as a solo entertainer and an actor in sketches". Elsewhere "Tommy Handley had a good singing voice and after the war travelled the country doing musical comedy."[2] Same ref talks about his "quick-fire patter": patter song is a thing, and it might be illuminating to trace the ITMA format that way. Well, I was only making sure I knew Tommy Trinder from Tommy Handley. Charles Matthews (talk) 11:42, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

"Comedian" is a much wider term than just "stand-up comedian" (the "stand-up" element, by its very nature, is showing it is a subset of the larger meaning of "comedian"). To quote the opening sentence of the ONDB: "Handley, Thomas Reginald [Tommy] (1892–1949), comedian, was born ...", and the reliable sources (which should be our guiding lights) overwhelmingly describe him as such. - SchroCat (talk) 13:32, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Indeed. As far as I can see, he was, early on, a concert party (entertainment) comedian and singer. That would have been a recognised type of comedian at the time, particularly as seen in pierrot shows. Acts were sometimes described as vaudeville or burlesque, and he is also called a variety entertainer. Music hall per our article "faded away after 1918" as it became variety. Given that both "music hall" and "comedian" are broad terms, you can just it let lie and then the issue is not that it is provably untrue. Some sources say "concert party" was an important progenitor of ITMA, which sounds more helpful. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:35, 23 March 2024 (UTC)