text:
Talk:H2g2

 * If you are a h2g2 Researcher wanting to become a Wikipedian, please take a look at our guide for h2g2 Researchers.

TiTled
This conversation page does not show it, but the idea is to reply or start a conversation at the bottom. (There could be some advanced mechanism to jump to the end but hey, this is not dna powered technology)   83.163.143.216 (talk) 07:54, 20 April 2015 (UTC) Top conversation is year 2003, bottom 2015

From the brief intro I read for H2G2, it sounds like it gives authors the ability to create a fictional future by writing an encyclopedia. That sounds like fun. I'd love to set something up like that, where users can post about future events and technologies. I can't provide such computers for that.

 * Nah. I imagine you're thinking of Book of the Future, another site running on the same dna software as h2g2, but with a different ethos and purpose. If you have an account on any dna community, you can post on any of the others, and internal style links do work between them (i.e., you don't need the full url, only the last part, to create a link), but they are different sites. A full listing is available at this dna hub page.

 * TRiG 00:27, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

For those who are interested, I have posted a reply to the H2G2 article/discussion about Wikipedia here --Eloquence 16:48 Jan 6, 2003 (UTC)

That's an unstable link. A link to a h2g2 conversation which ends in latest=1 simply shows you the last page of the conversation (with 20 posts to a page). If many more posts get added to that conversation the link will point to somewhere else. (This is, admittedly, unlikely to happen. It's a Peer Review conversation for an article which has now been accepted into the Edited Guide, so there's little more to say about it. But the principle remains.) You're better off to mess about with the skip and show fields, so, try this. TRiG.87.232.43.104 16:11, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Should the bits in here about various volunteer schemes, clubs, etc link externally to relevant h2g2 pages? GTBacchus

 * I'm mostly unfussed. I think it'd be worth linking to /volunteers, but maybe not /scouts : /editorial-process, but not /subeditors-style. Other thoughts? -Martin

-

In a recent Slashdot story, an anonymous user remarked the following:

No, you're not the only one. They have a ridiculous position on word censorship, choosing to st*r most of the letters out if someone might find it offensive. I mean, what the fuck? It's not as if you can't discern what the word actually is.

Also, if the BBC is maintaining media silence on a topic and you post on it, your post will be deleted. This happened recently on a "what music are you listening to?" thread - someone posted that they were listening to something by the Who. And because Pete Townsend was in the news recently as a suspected paedophile, the post got removed - it wasn't even talking about the case! Same with John Leslie a while ago for those rape allegations. *Everything* mentioning his name was removed.

Can a H2G2 regular verify these claims? If they are true, the information should be added to the article. --Eloquence 16:30 Jan 22, 2003 (UTC)
 * Huh. I didn't hear about the Townsend thing, and I'm a regular on that thread.  Yes, they star the middle letters out of 'shit', 'fuck', etc, which is kind of juvenile, but whatever.  Like Mr Slashdot Anonymous said, there's no question what the word actually is.

 * Regarding BBC media silence and political issues... I don't have much experience with it. They do have a team of libel lawyers, being the BBC.  Duh.  Also, being the BBC, they have little experience or comfort with the anarchy of cyberspace.  MyRedDice can tell you more about that; he tried to get an entry through on the Nestlé boycott.  My hunch - and I've been there over 2 years - is that the post about listening to The Who got reinstated when the actual staff showed up in the morning.  Not all moderators (hired censors, usually students) know what they're doing, and they're probably told to err on the side of caution.  Their decisions are typically reviewed by h2g2 staff, and can be appealed. -GTBacchus 18:41 Jan 22, 2003 (UTC)

 * Yes, it is true on all counts. I do believe that such censorship has taken its toll on the community. It is quite telling that the most popular conversations tend to be things like "Sentence game: add four words!" rather then anything more serious.

Ok, I did some checking. There's one big 'What Music are you Listening to?' thread, that's been going on for years. The last time someone posted there that they were listening to The Who was over a week ago. See posts #6414 and 6417 on this page. I asked about any postings having been hidden in post #6590, and received an answer in #6593 on this page. Quoting the reply I got:

GTB, it is possible that a post was yikesed for mentioning the Who. The italics contacted the ACEs over the weekend when the allegations about Pete Townshend were first reported, asking us to look out for anything that could be construed as defamation. Quite a few posts were pulled as a result.

Well, if any posts were pulled from the "what music?" thread, they were put back pretty quickly, because there are none missing from the last week. -GTBacchus 21:56 Jan 22, 2003 (UTC)

OK, I'll try to add something about moderation once the wiki is a bit more responsive again. --Eloquence 22:11 Jan 22, 2003 (UTC)

 * I added a bit. Does that cover it, do you think? -GTBacchus 07:48 Jan 23, 2003 (UTC)

 * Seems fair enough to me. I don't know if there are other opinions on this matter (perhaps ex-H2G2 users who say they were driven away by heavy handed moderation) and if there are, their opinions should be included as per NPOV. But I don't have enough experience with H2G2 to judge whether this is the case. --Eloquence 09:25 Jan 23, 2003 (UTC)

 * Regarding Nestlé, yes my article on the Nestlé boycott was slapped down fairly heavily, and I was told not to put it back up until I could prove, preferably by paying a lawyer to review it, that:
 * Nothing I said was defamatory
 * Nothing on any website I linked to was defamatory

 * Unsurprisingly, I gave up at that point, and the entry remains a stub. Regarding people leaving because of moderation - there have been some, certainly. I could try and find quotes and suchlike, perhaps. Martin

 * Martin, any quotes or additional information would be great. BTW, the coverage of the boycott in our Nestlé article is somewhat brief, so please add any relevant facts. --Eloquence 10:53 Jan 23, 2003 (UTC)

 * There's slightly more under Infant formula, but yeah. -GTBacchus 10:55 Jan 23, 2003 (UTC)

I'm suprised no-ones mentioned the current situation with moderation. All posts about Iraq are being hidden, this has caused a lot of outrage, and a petition with quite a few signees. -- Tango

 * The article says On 17 March 2003, h2g2 issued guidelines for discussions during the 2003 Iraq war, including saying that "Postings and Entries on the subject of the conflict posted to h2g2 will be removed".

 * If you'd like to add something on the petition and such, please do - I'm not following h2g2 politics much now, so I miss some of the details... ;-) Martin

 * 'Rude words' are acceptable if they are considered to be 'Editorially Justified'. See, for example, The Origins and Common Usage of British Swear-words. But there has now been a filter added, to prevent words of this nature being added to the Guide, either in articles or in conversation forums. This has sparked community outrage. Most of 'em didn't swear anyway, but they don't like being treated like naughty children. (See The h2g2 Profanisaurus for one of the more imaginative responses.)

TRiG.87.232.43.104 16:11, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll add that the filter has two lists of words it checks. Words on list one are blocked, and postings containing these words cannot be posted. Entries containing these words still stand, but cannot be edited unless the words are removed. (Postings can't be edited anyway.) Words on list two are not blocked, but posts containing these words are automatically referred to the moderators as soon as they're posted. I would guess that Townsend was added to that second list while he was in the news, so any post containing his name would have been automatically hidden until it had been reviewed by a moderator. Nothing sinister. Similarly, names of British political parties are added to that second list at election times.

TRiG (talk) 17:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to include a photo or two of an h2g2 meetup - if anyone has a suitable photo they wouldn't mind putting under the GFDL, speak up :)

Should this article be renamed 'h2g2' - ie, with the letters in lower case? Every single reference in the article has the name appearing in that format. I notice also that the h2g2 website itself always uses the lower case in titles, etc. R Lowry 20:32, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)

 * Unfortunately, that's not possible -- Wikipedia articles have to start with an upper case letter.—Eloquence 20:52, Aug 1, 2003 (UTC)

 * Ah, that's a shame. I don't suppose there's really any way around that. R Lowry 23:08, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)

-

The Editors list is now out of date (Anna has left), and I'd prefer that my name was removed from the list please. I'm identifiable from my first name alone online, and I'm careful who I tell that I work on h2g2. Can you tweak it so I'm disguised or something? I don't want to identify myself here easily either, but MyRedDice once stayed overnight in my house before I was an Editor, so that should give him a clue.

And as a matter of being perfectly correct, Plain wasn't designed for the digibox users. A bug was about to be fixed that meant that the digibox users couldn't use conversations once they got to a certain amount of postings, so we were trying to sort something out. We happened to find out that Jim was doing the new skin, and asked him to upload it so that it could be used, which is why it's unfinished and unofficial. As it happens, I think the bug reverted again, it's done that a couple of times I think.

I know that the idea of this site is that anyone can do corrections, but I can't bring myself to do that. If the changes aren't going to be welcome, and will be changed back, it seems a bit pointless.

I hope that I've done this right, I nearly posted it in the middle of someone else's comment.

 * I've temporarily removed the list from the article. With apologies for the inconvenience. R Lowry 19:59, 28 Aug 2003 (UTC)

If h2g2 has reduced its support staff (ie, the Italics team) from six to two, there obviously isn't much point in bothering with an Italics list anymore. Therefore I've removed it altogether from the above discussion. R Lowry 05:13, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I've put the UnderGuide section in with the parts about Peer Review and so forth, rather than Community, because I thought it ought to be nearer the AWW. On the other hand, I'm not sure if it should be considered part of the "Editing Process" - maybe the heading needs changing, or splitting? - IMSoP

 * Maybe just pluralise? "Editing processes"? Martin 17:37, 14 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Editing Processes
I just removed this from the article:

 * The in-house editors make few changes—the most visible of which is appending a "Related BBC links" section to entries that includes a link for readers to search BBCi for other entries on the same subject.

In fact, one of the most frequent jobs of the curators is to remove this section from older Entries. They're put in as references instead now (along with other links: links to h2g2 Edited Entries, the BBC, and External websites can all go in the appropriate place in the text or in the references section, and all links, whether they appear in the text or not, appear in the sidebar, automatically divided into the three sections mentioned (See, for example A653230 The Big Bang.)). And usually the Researcher does it himself. Or the Sub-editor can add it.

TRiG.87.232.43.104 22:22, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Link
It seems Anthony DiPierro has removed the link to the introduction for h2g2 Researchers without so much as an edit summary. Personally, I think this was a perfectly valid inclusion, since it's more than likely that a seasoned hootooite coming upon Wikipedia will both think to look up h2g2 and wonder about where the projects differ. I won't revert instantly, in case Anthony makes a decent case for the removal, but I reckon it should stay. - IMSoP 18:42, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Perhaps the link should be at the bottom not the top?
 * Anthony is on a "remove self-references" drive, AFAIK - he's perhaps unaware that italic text that is essentially editorial commentary is normally allowed to self-reference: spoiler warnings and NPOV disputes being examples. Martin 18:46, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Spoiler warnings and NPOV disputes are part of the mediawiki namespace. Self-references in the mediawiki namespace are acceptable. Furthermore, neither the spoiler warnings nor the NPOV messages reference Wikipedia by name. They link to Wikipedia namespace, but this can easily be changed in forks by two simple edits to the mediawiki namespace. Anthony DiPierro 18:47, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't see why the distinction between namespaces makes any odds - as far as the reader is concerned, the page simply refers to a relevant piece of meta-information in all three cases. Now, if we were to make some kind of stable, or even paper, version then I'd agree that such editorial comments should be kept to an absolute minimum. But since this is in fact an active project and a website to which people can happily deep link, I think it is very sensible to try and pre-empt users' needs in this way.
 * Is there a discussion about this I can post to, or should I start one on the Village pump? - IMSoP 19:24, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * The point is that self-references make it hard for forks. See avoid self-references. Anthony DiPierro 19:28, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * OK, I get the point on forking now. I'm still not sure where the best compromise lies in this particular case though - the message is likely to get us more contributors, and thus further our aims, but confuse readers of forks, and thus have negative impact on their aims.

 * It would be nice if there were some way we could mark text ready for people to remove on forks. Perhaps we should just tell forkers to remove links beginning "Wikipedia:" unless their fork has an equivalent page beginning ":". Then we could just put it as a see-also at the bottom and they could trawl the database easily enough.
 * Also, do all forks use the MediaWiki software to import their content? 'Cos if they just take the end result, the s will have been transcluded before they have a chance to edit them anyway. - IMSoP 19:46, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Just make it a mediawiki msg. Do all forks use the Mediawiki software? No, but they all have to translate the wiki markup in some way.  Unless I guess if they scrape the html, which I would think is rare.  Anthony DiPierro 21:44, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * It seems a bit hacky to create a page of the form MediaWiki:Editorial comment on article X. And I may be just thinking of problems for their own sake now, but if we do it that way, then how will forks that do use the mediawiki software be any the wiser that it needs changing than if we had just left it in the article in the first place? - IMSoP 03:36, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, I agree, of course, that's why I haven't done it. I don't see why this message is so necessary in the first place.  The idea is that you don't import the mediawiki namespace, and then you don't show references to nonexistent mediawiki messages.  Since the entire message is encapsulated in the message, you know exactly what to remove.  It's actually extremely easy to do on an automated basis, unlike trying to parse links to other namespaces and figure out what text applies to that link and needs to be removed.  Pretty much an AI-hard problem. Anthony DiPierro 03:45, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I've just realised that an upcoming software feature will allow creation of templates, rather than only fixed-text messages, so we will simply be able to say (or whatever the syntax turns out to be). It's still rather hacky, but less so than a single-use msg. There may even be ways of making use of the template-ness, while we're at it. - IMSoP 09:42, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Sure. Everything2 is another example, I just haven't bothered to remove that one yet. Anthony DiPierro 15:28, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I think the ideal would be markup of the style <Wikipedia-specific>h2g2 readers wishing to contribute... blah blah.</Wikipedia-specific>. In the meantime, why not put the relevant text at the top of the talk page? Martin 21:38, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

''In my experience, however, people who mirror or fork the entire encyclopedia don't even bother to filter out the Talk, User, and Wikipedia namespace, so concern about including project-specific information seems to be low. -- StephenGilbert'' [copied from HTwoGTwo]

 * Right, and some of us do. So concern is not low. Anthony DiPierro 21:42, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

"Low" doesn't mean "non-existent". If you look at most copies of the Wikipedia database online, they have all the project specific information (talk and user pages, etc) still there. I've noticed that your copy does indeed filter them out, so that's one who does care. That's still a low number. It doesn't mean that self-refences are a good idea, though. Personally, I (along with others) agree with you that self-refences should be avoided in articles.

Also, and this is someone off-topic, but I notice that you have "Copyright (c) 2004 Anthony DiPierro" on your front page. It's not really a big deal, but each contributor still maintains the copyright over his or her Wikipedia contributions, and then licenses it under the GFDL. I'm guessing that everyone hasn't signed their copyrights over to you. ;-) -- Stephen Gilbert

 * I'm not going to argue with you over the meaning of the word low.

 * Of course each contributor still maintains the copyright over his or her own contributions (except for contributions made directly to McFly, which are released into the public domain). However, I own the copyright on the resulting derivative work.  This is how copyright works.  Wikipedia contains no copyright notice, or I would include that copyright notice along with mine. And yes, it's completely off topic.  Anthony DiPierro 13:15, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * My understanding is that you own a joint copyright on the resulting derivative work, but this may be UK-specific. Martin 17:59, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * In the US, "The subject matter of copyright as specified by section 102 includes compilations and derivative works, but protection for a work employing preexisting material in which copyright subsists does not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully." and "The copyright in a compilation or derivative work extends only to the material contributed by the author of such work, as distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work, and does not imply any exclusive right in the preexisting material. The copyright in such work is independent of, and does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration, ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright protection in the preexisting material." Anthony DiPierro 19:59, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Title
{wrongtitle|title=h2g2} This template belongs on the article, not the Talk page. I'll insert it there. JamesMLane 23:23, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Skins
An anon's edit states that Brunel has "black text on white backgrounds". My homepage on h2g2 appears as white text on black background, and I thought that was Brunel. Can anyone familiar with h2g2 offer a clarification? JamesMLane 23:13, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I've had a look at my personal space (I use Brunel) and the top bits (which list conversations I've subscribed to, and my messages, is black, with some writing yellow, and some black. However, the actual text of my journal is black text on a white background, and similarly for my introduction.

This seems to apply to the main text of entries themselves, although I think all heading are in red. Here is an example entry, in the brunel skin. Silverfish 23:31, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * The design was originally supposed to be white text on black, until it was pointed out that all the existing graphics on site would only work against a blue or white background as they were borderless and anti-aliased to the appropriate background. Although the original art assets existing, nobody wanted to pay for the time it would take to re-render all the images to a third background colour (and maintain three different copies of all images, instead of just two).

 * So, the skin had to cope with white/yellow on black for all auto-generated text, but falling back to black on white for all user-generated text section. Needless to say, it was a nightmare for the HTML coder trying to get it all working in all the various browsers the BBC has to support.

Recent edit
I stumbled upon this article on this site and I thought I'd give it an update, with the adding of the paragraph about the new h2g2 mobile edition. As a h2g2 researcher myself (U599405 if anyone would like to contact me there) there's been a lot of things going about this recently, so I thought it important to add to this.

See ya,

David Shoare (Dave, also known as Bob, scourge of the universe and purveyor of bad poetry on h2g2)

NPOV
The talk page had an NPOV embedded in it which appears to be erroneous in the context of an NPOV alert. (It was connected with a discussion now long concluded on referencing.) I have removed the NPOV tag. If this is felt to be incorrect I apologise. --Silver149 6 July 2005 09:49 (UTC)

de-merge h2g2 from BBC
This is an interesting time. The BBC are making very interesting moves in the area of free content - all of Beethoven available for free download. The initatives to make all of their content and archive available for "re-mixing". However, at the same time they have a stated editorial policy of being the fact-based and trusted, respected, voice of balanced journalism. One can see their dilema!

Suggest that h2g2 contributors and content move to wikepedia - this will free up the BBC lawyers to worry about more important things (like how to prize out rights from ancient performers so we can all enjoy the old comedy shows) while bringing fresh content to wikipedia.

 * Well, firstly, this seems to be a posting which would be better directed at h2g2 Researchers than at Wikipedians. And secondly, I disagree: h2g2 and Wikipedia are very different in their outlook, approach, style, and community structure; much of the content of h2g2 would be unwelcome in Wikipedia, and you can't just "transplant" a whole community. Although I've been inactive for some time now, I was a regular user of h2g2 both before and after Rupert (the BBC takeover), and, yes, there have always been dilemmas and differences of opinion (I was even a Zaphodista; I guess technically still am), but over time the BBC and the h2g2 community got used to each other, and I see no reason things can't carry on in that spirit of compromise indefinitely. Hell, every community has to compromise on all sorts of key issues, all the time, and I think h2g2's done rather well, in general... - IMSoP 20:13, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Oh definately, there is no way h2g2's content could ever merge with Wikipedia's. Reason numero uno would be that there is already a wikipedia entry on almost every topic h2g2's edited guide covers. Number two would of course be the different standards and styles, number three would be the community -- there is a heck of alot more to h2g2 than an encyclopedia. In fact, many h2g2 researchers see the encyclopedia as secondary (though they're not vocal about it) to the community.
 * The two sites are fundamentally different in their stated purposes/functions. Wikipedia's function is to write a free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. h2g2's function is to provide a comprehensive guide to Life, the Universe and Everything written by a dedicated community. You could, I suppose, wonder whether if the site (h2g2) were ever to break up with the BBC, whether it would be possible to run a "new" h2g2 site with a more wiki-like format, such as importing all of it's old content into the mediawiki software somehow ... but I doubt that could ever happen, even if people wanted to. --Nerd42 23:44, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

 * We shall see212.188.147.34 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:00, 11 October 2011 (UTC).

Where to go now when h2g2 is down?
Isn't there some place off-site of h2g2 for members to talk when h2g2 is down? Report problems? It was down a few minutes ago so I looked up this entry to see if it had a link to such a place. Sadly, it does not. I heard once that there was such a site ... but I don't remember where or what exactly ... (by the way, I'm Researcher U203906) --Nerd42 23:44, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Twas n2g2, "nowhere 2 go 2," which doesn't seem to exist anymore. (I'm U166086) -GTBacchus(talk) 07:09, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I think I found it at Yahoo while browsing through h2Jargon. TRiG 00:10, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

User page template for h2g2 Researchers
User:Nerd42 has created "a template created for h2g2 Researchers who are also wiki users to add to their User Pages" at Template:H2G2Researcher. I removed this from the article page in an effort to avoid self-references in articles. — Jeff | (talk) | 06:18, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree with avoiding the self-reference, but I think the template could be useful. I suggest to Nerd42 that he add it to Guide for h2g2 Researchers.  (I won't be bold and do it myself because it's Nerd42's creation.) JamesMLane 07:53, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Ooh!! Didn't know there was such a thing. I originally created the template for Uncyclopedia. --Nerd42 23:34, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Stats
Are there any statistics on the number of entries or the growth over time?--Eloquence* 23:10, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah, I found this.--Eloquence* 23:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

There were in the article, however only measured by the site itself they were removed. NB you are using a malformed URL 83.163.143.216 (talk) 21:55, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Included quote from h2g2 UpdateForum: Is this acceptable?
The History revision marked "Added information on Editorial Feedback to the Update section". Have quoted from h2g2 UpdateForum. Am new to Wikipedia, and don't yet know the ropes. Should it be taken out again? TRiG 00:37, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't see a problem with that TRiG. Stu   ’Bout ye!  07:56, 6 June 2006 (UTC) (U816232)

Talking heads
Should I have put it in

 * this entry is not signed and doesn't make sense.... if it is referring to something above it should be placed in that section. Vcrs 02:52, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Acronym problems?
Why is the acronym h2g2 and not hg2g? It doesn't make sense. Should this be mentioned or acknowledged here in the article at all? Should someone tell the BBC? Or am I just missing some clever inside joke among true fans of the book? .... just curious Vcrs 02:52, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

 * The title The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy[3] is often abbreviated as "HHGTTG", (as used on fan websites) or "H2G2" (first used by Neil Gaiman as a chapter title in Don't Panic and later by the online guide run by the BBC). - from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy --C Hawke 19:10, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

 * h2g2 is meant to be a bit like a chemical formula, I think. 2 h's (Hitch and Hikers) and 2 g's (Guide and Galaxy), gives h2g2. --Tango 14:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Ah, I see. The 2's could also be read as exponents - H-squared G-squared. HitchHiker's GuideGalaxy. Got it. (In case my question was unclear, I was reading the 2's the way people use "2" in (for example) instant messaging, as a replacement for "to," as in, "to the Galaxy." Thus, since there's only one "to" in the title, the two 2's in the acronym confused me).

 * Thank you so much for taking time to explain. :-)

 * Vcrs 23:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

h2g2

ok I can understand the H2g (Hitchhikers Guide 2 Galaxy), but what is the 2nd 2 (to) for? or is it just for something like part 2? -- Hartmann Schedel II (talk) 17:00, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

 * Read before you post, (this conversation style sucks I know, still the answer is already there)

83.163.143.216 (talk) 18:08, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

This bit is incorrect

 * The content of the project is written by visitors to its website and is broadly divided into two parts: a peer-reviewed "Edited Guide", mostly consisting of more thorough articles on traditional encyclopaedic subjects, and an unedited part that includes many more idiosyncratic topics, such as plastic bag bras[2], teaching cats to fetch[3], or using spoons[4].

All articles mentioned here are actually in the Edited Guide. The EG can contain anything which conforms to the Writing Guidelines, which do not contain a requirement for notability. As long as an entry is factual and well written, it can go in. The Unedited Guide contains everything else, including rough drafts of entries in the EG.

I know I could change this myself, but I don't feel like it at the moment.

TRiG (talk) 17:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

 * Fixed. Martin (talk) 20:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Alexa Rank

 * The rank given for H2G2 is misquoted. If you follow the reference given and mouseover the rank (now 64 not 61) you will see this rank is for bbc.co.uk, not specifically H2G2.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drown (talk • contribs) 21:04, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikiprojects
I've added h2g2 to the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and Websites wikiprojects, as I felt it belonged there. Some editors from those wikiprojects may be interested in helping improve this article too. Deltawk (talk) 21:28, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Recent history/current status
My impression of h2g2 is, admittedly based on the occasional anecdote, that it is a failed competitor to Wikipedia & has seen a corresponding fall-off in activity. However, following the link above & viewing its activity statistics, it appears that h2g2 is still active -- less so than Wikipedia, but on a level much higher than many social media websites. Can anyone provide information on what's been happening there in the last 5-10 years (yes, with verifiable sources), & whether its in a downwards spiral or its simply stabilized at a less active level? -- llywrch (talk) 19:36, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

"a failed competitor to Wikipedia" is a reasonable impression, given that it is an impression based on occasional anecdote. In fact, what h2g2 actually is is hard to describe. It is far easier to describe it in terms of what it is not - and it is not, and never has been, a competitor to Wikipedia, not least because it predates Wikipedia by almost two years. "a failed competitor to Facebook" is another possible misunderstanding, inasmuch as it has elements of social networking (not least its use of "My Space" as the label for a registered user's home page with their list of interactions), but it's not just that, either.

I'm not sure what you mean by "verifiable sources", as the site itself is a near-complete record of everything that's happened there in the last ten years - certainly conversation postings cannot be edited once posted. h2g2 is not a wiki - things don't disappear.

Current status at time of writing is that the site is undergoing transfer from BBC ownership to the ownership of Not Panicking Ltd., the new owners, a process driven in large part by the efforts of the h2g2 community consortium, a collective of motivated individual users of the site. Whether this constitutes a "downward spiral" or the next step in its evolution remains to be seen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.188.147.34 (talk) 15:57, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Move from BBC
H2g2 has now moved from the BBC. The new log in page says 'No researcher left behind'. I have been trying to get into the new site for several weeks now without sucess. One of the 'gurus' said he had passed my problem on, and since then despite several e-mails to the site I still can't get in to up date my contribution. So i hope others have better luck than me. It looks like the contributions I made over several years will never be added too!Betty Butt (talk) 06:38, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Why not accepted as Source?
To anyone from h2g2 this is nbb (ACE). Can anyone figure out why Wiki accepts any EG as a reliable source for an entry, but is unwilling to trust h2g2 as a source about itself? The primary/secondary source rules seem a bit odd here - until very recently h2g2 was backed by the bbc. The bbc can be used a source when an entry is done on any of its programs. An annoying bit of hypocrisy Nosebagbear (talk) 15:14, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

 * Where at Wikipedia is discussion of h2g2 as a source? --P64 (talk) 01:33, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

 * What is EG as in "Wiki accepts any EG as a reliable source"? Encyclopedia Galactica? 2.28.151.187 (talk) 23:49, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
 * "EG" is standing for "Edited Guide". h2g2 has articles in the edited guide, which go through peer review and checking, and the UG, which is everything else. Nosebagbear (talk) 01:42, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

I did about three years after Nosebagbear Perhaps Nosebagbear should report to the Society of Time Travellers

As far as I understand we can not describe a site by using the site itself as reference.

In which case I shall leave it to a more energetic Editor than I to remove about 40 sources from the primary beeb page that use bbc news articles as their supporting source (allowing for exclusions for publically submitted accounts etc). Nosebagbear (talk) 18:02, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

83.163.143.216 (talk) 21:50, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

There's even one more allusion hidden in the project title...
I dunno whether Douglas Adams ever thought of that when conceiving it, but it actually does remind one a lot of R2-D2, the Star Wars droid. However, putting this into the article might be considered original research, even though both Adams' novel and Star Wars are in the very same genre: Sci-Fi. -andy 77.190.12.81 (talk) 07:25, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

 * No, he somewhere explicitly states he did not refer to the Dalek like robot.

Besides C3P0 was the android, R2D2 the garbage bin.  83.163.143.216 (talk) 21:37, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Needs a trim
There's a lot of in-universe writing here, isn't there? Everything in the article needs to be sourced to reliable third-party sources, not to the site itself. Also, why the lower-case title? --John (talk) 19:49, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

 a trim ?  what you have done can be concidered desecration. Not only have you removed the reference to the user page of the founder of h2g2 (as being used as a memorial site), you also removed about all of the content of this article.  Perhaps the site is not published about very much, perhaps the real life blood of the site, the community is not clear to you. But showing any respect for a site predating wiki or texting would be in place.  The site is named h2g2 not H2G2 (shouting) nor hg2g (some texting jibberish), it may even be the name in undercasts has to do with the computer technology of that era, anyway we Researchers have learned it is h2g2, perhaps a bit quirky perhaps a bit odd, just deal with it. <BR/> I have read the entire backlog of contributions (not only this Talk page) and for what I see many Researchers have tried to help you, wiki, in creating an informative and as far as possible correct article. In some attemp to help I even tried finding useful cites and references about what really constitutes the Society that makes up the site. However even an official Library Curator site manages to malform the name. So far any internet based references.<BR/> We, Researchers, concider the internet per definition flawed and temporary, that is the internet outside HooToo.

83.163.143.216 (talk) 04:07, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

<Sorry> for the outburst. <BR/> <BR/> Well it was 19th of April < http://h2g2.com/user/U170113 > the day one of our friends did not appear nor did he the next day, it was his brother who told us by will he had deceased. If you check the link you will see even today this researcher is missed.<BR/> I read in the backlog of the article Peta (one of the former italics who had known the man {D.N.A.} personally) included the memorial at his user page.<BR/> <BR/> 83.163.143.216 (talk) 20:26, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

April 2015
Too loose language, not enough internal links not many external references. Bullets for list. . . Is there an Editor in the house? I am not GURU enough on this site (it has been years).

83.163.143.216 (talk) 20:25, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

"Been there lurking for a while again. The site is still active, growing and under development. This obliges the Wiki community to use some present tense when considering that aspect discribing the state! Apparently I still feel involved

83.163.143.216 (talk) 08:08, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Traveller in Time on his head "What does all this BBC commment on this page. As far as I can see the BBC only keeps a *sorry for the inconvenience* sign on site."

83.163.143.216 (talk) 08:08, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

APPLYING THE RULES
Traveller in Time chizzling the rules in stone<BR/> "Well lets apply the rules as strict as they seem to go . . . ."<BR/> 83.163.143.216 (talk) 17:34, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Please read our wp:talk page guidelines. Article talk pages are for discussions about improving the article. If you have some ideas about how to do that, based on reliable sources, feel free to propose here, but please try to avoid speaking in riddles. - DVdm (talk) 17:45, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Changed broken links, checked entries they link to. <BR/> Removed anything about the functionality and society but a single paragraph.<BR/> Removed any redundant BBC reference, site Was BBC but they thrown it away (and in the process broke it on many places).<BR/> I am not going to read any more of your set in stone rules as they obviously seem only to apply for some.<BR/> <BR/> 83.163.143.216 (talk) 19:16, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

 * I have removed this unsourced part. If you have a reliable source, then we can add the content. Otherwise it does not belong on Wikipedia. I also warned you on your talk page. - DVdm (talk) 20:21, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

H2gs
I posted:
 * ok I can understand the H2g (Hitchhikers Guide 2 Galaxy), but what is the 2nd 2 (to) for? or is it just for something like part 2? -- Hartmann Schedel II (talk) 17:00, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
 * sosmebody answered:
 * Read before you post, (this conversation style sucks I know, still the answer is already there) 83.163.143.216 (talk) 18:08, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

someboy deleted this topic of the discussion - wth is this? Which right to deletion had the one who didi this?

And still I don't see an answer for the 2nd '2' -- Hartmann Schedel  <sup style="color:#FF7F00; font-family:arial; font-size:small;">cheers  17:51, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

 * Sorry for the rather crude replacement. This has been discussed before as you could read under the 'Acronym problems?' section as well as I did not delete the title just reduced it to the desired undercasts.
 * h2g2 is the name of the Website, it fits beautiful in the logo, it is part of our history, long predating texting. Actually a story is Douglas Adams stated he preferred Hitchhikers above Hitch Hikers. This only strengthens our clinging to the quirky way to spell it.
 * I do not blame anyone for misinterpreting or misspelling the name, just believe us it is 'h2g2' no capitals. It is annoying though that many (not all) sources referring to the site jibber it beyond recognition.
 * (You may call me Traveller in Time (a smiley of a bluetit) also not unique on these pages)

83.163.143.216 (talk) 00:23, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ah ok, I have read now the Acronym problems-Section, but it is possible, that one, if having a queston not necessarily read a whole discussion side in wikipedia - and because my english is not very well, I understood from the section more or less this: Neil Gaiman used this first as acronym and since than it become common. And I did the same mistake than the asker: I saw the "2" as "to" -- Hartmann Schedel  <sup style="color:#FF7F00; font-family:arial; font-size:small;">cheers  18:22, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Well english is not my mother tongue either, I just happened to drop in on h2g2 searching for 'nothing'. And again my apology for not giving a straight answer in my reply. Also as you can find on these pages I did not really enjoy the experience I got here. Here goes an explanation, not sourced outside of HooToo.

'The Hithikers Guide to the Galaxy' Now we strip the determiners and write hitchikers the old style 'Hitch Hikers Guide Galaxy' Abbreviate 'HHGG' So we have 2Hs and 2Gs. Now we stop shouting. 'h2g2' Whether it is a mathematical or chemical formula or part of the archaic URL it fits HooToo.

As you may find in the comments by C Hawke and Tango, they say more or less the same. Today is Towel Day ! <TiT> 83.163.143.216 (talk) 19:54, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on H2g2. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20110920162212/http://www.examiner.co.uk/leisure-and-entertainment/whats-on-west-yorkshire/2009/05/15/forum-web-wonder-86081-23628073/ to http://www.examiner.co.uk/leisure-and-entertainment/whats-on-west-yorkshire/2009/05/15/forum-web-wonder-86081-23628073/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:31, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Current status: Active ?
The info box says "Current status Active", but when I visit the site, the links from the front page generally seem to be going to some sort of failure/not found page. The description of it's true current status seems to need an update (unmaintained? unreliable?) DKEdwards (talk) 18:08, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

 * I think you must just have been unlucky and caught the site during a system's problem. As far as I can see, it's still going strong, and the front page links to content published within the last few days. - IMSoP (talk) 22:42, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The facebook page did note their front article had had a technical hissy fit a couple of days ago, if that's still ongoing that would explain it. They're definitely less active than even in my time, but still ongoing Nosebagbear (talk) 10:13, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:H2g2


text:
Old Faithful Inn

The Old Faithful Inn is a hotel in the western United States with a view of the Old Faithful Geyser, located in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. The Inn has a multi-story log lobby, flanked by long frame wings containing guest rooms. In the western portion of the park, it sits at an approximate elevation of 7350 ft above sea level.

With its log and limb lobby and massive (500 ST, 85 ft) stone fireplace, the inn is an example of the "Golden Age" of rustic resort architecture, a style which is also known as National Park Service Rustic. It is one of the few log hotels still standing in the United States, and was the first of the great park lodges of the American west.

Initial construction was carried out over the winter of 1903–1904, largely using locally obtained materials including lodgepole pine and rhyolite stone. When the Old Faithful Inn first opened in the spring of 1904, it boasted electric lights and steam heat.

The structure is the largest log hotel in the world; possibly even the largest log building in the world. In 2007 the American Institute of Architects conducted a survey to determine the 150 favorite buildings in America; the Old Faithful Inn ranked 36. The Inn, which was designated a National Historic Landmark in 1987, is itself part of the Old Faithful Historic District. Old Faithful Inn is a member of Historic Hotels of America, the official program of the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

Design
The inn's architect was 29-year-old Robert Reamer, an architect for the Yellowstone Park Company, which was affiliated with the Northern Pacific Railway. Reamer was hired by Harry W. Child, the president of the Yellowstone Park Company, who had met Reamer in San Diego through mutual acquaintances. Reamer designed the lobby and the initial phase of guest rooms, known as the Old House, which was built in 1903–1904, much of it in the long winter. The east wing was extended in 1913–14, and the west wing in 1927, creating a single structure almost 700 ft long. The Old House is rotated 90 degrees with respect to Old Faithful so that a view of the geyser is framed by the entrance porch for arriving visitors. The porch roof provides a viewing platform for viewing eruptions of Old Faithful and other geysers, while the main facade faces Geyser Hill across the Firehole River, where the old Circuit Road once ran through the geyser basin.

The central feature of the Old House is a tall gabled log structure housing the lobby, dominated by a deep, steeply-pitching shingled roof. The Old House uses load-bearing log lower exterior walls with a log pole interior framework supporting seven stories, six of which are the roof structure. The upper gable walls are of milled lumber framing with shingle sheathing. The front slope of the shingled roof is accented by shed and gabled dormers, some of which are purely decorative. Both interior and exterior framing is supported by twisted or curved branches, giving the entire structure a strongly rustic air. There are two levels of balconies, the lower encircling the lobby and the upper on two sides. Stairs climb from the second balcony to a platform in the framing known as the "Crow's Nest" which once was used by musicians to entertain guests, then on to the crown of the gable 92 ft above the lobby floor. The entire structure is crowned by a roof walk that once held searchlights to illuminate Old Faithful Geyser at night. The original guest wings are $3 1/2$ stories tall on either side of the lobby. It is anchored to the ground by a rhyolite foundation that extends to the first floor window sills.

Offset to the southeast corner, the stone fireplace measures 16 ft square at the base. It features four main hearths, one on each face, with smaller hearths, each with a flue, at the corners. The stone extends to the roof, and until it was damaged by earthquake, a brick flue extended above the roof, covered in log cribbing. An ironwork clock decorates the north face of the upper chimney in the lobby. The fireplace is centered in a shallow depression in the lobby floor that sets the area around its hearths apart from the rest of the lobby. Custom ironwork, most notable in the main entrance door and the clock, was forged at the site by an ironmonger named Colpitts.

The dining room extends to the south of the lobby, with log scissors trusses supporting a more shallowly-pitched roof at right angles to the lobby roof. The dining room has its own stone fireplace, less massive than the lobby's, but still large. The Old House guest rooms retain much of their original character.

The east and west wings were purposely designed by Reamer to be less prominent than the central house. The wings are three to four stories in height with a mansarded top floor and a flat roof. The east wing is straight, originally with 100 rooms. The west wing is Y-shaped, with 150 guest rooms as built. The interiors of the wings are unremarkable compared with the Old House.

History
The Old Faithful Inn replaced the Upper Geyser Basin Hotel, also known as the "Shack Hotel", which had burned down. The Northern Pacific Railroad, in the form of the Yellowstone Park Association operating company, was required by the terms of its concession to build a new hotel no closer than 1/8 mile of Old Faithful, a stipulation the Yellowstone Park Association observed to the letter. An initial design was prepared by architect A.W. Spalding in 1898, producing a design typical of the time, a turreted Queen Anne style hotel. The design was approved by the Park Service, but construction never started. Child instead hired Reamer to design a much more radical building with antecedents in the rustic camps of the Adirondacks. Design work took place in 1902, and construction started in 1903, with work continuing through the winter to open in 1904. The original cost of the Inn was about $140,000, using materials gathered from within the park. The hotel was furnished for another $25,000. Most of the logs came from a location about 8 mi south of Old Faithful, where a temporary sawmill produced boards as needed. Stone came from the Black Sand Basin and from a site along the road to Craig Pass about 5 mi to the east. The unusually-shaped log brackets were collected from the surrounding forests.

The Inn has been expanded and modified several times. In 1913 the East Wing was added to the 120-room original structure, and in 1922 the dining room was enlarged. In 1927–1928, the West Wing was built, and the front of the main building extended. All of these modifications were carried out under the supervision of the original architect, Robert Reamer. A 1927 addition to the dining room has since become home to the Bear Pit Lounge. Installed in 1936 just off the lobby, the first Bear Pit featured carved and inlaid wood panels with humorous scenes involving bears, created at Reamer's suggestion. When the lounge was converted to a coffee shop, the lounge was relocated to the dining room extension and the panels were replicated in etched glass in 1988. Some of the original panels remain in the snack bar. In 1940 the interior logs were peeled, revealing patterns created by bark beetles, and in 1966 the logs were cleaned and varnished. An automatic fire sprinkler system was added in 1948, together with fire doors in the wings.

Some of the original furnishings remain, while care has been taken with newer pieces to remain compatible with the rustic design. Some furniture at the Old Faithful Inn was salvaged from the Canyon Hotel before it was demolished, particularly the Limbert chairs in the dining room extension and some of the reading desks on the balcony.

The facility was closed for the duration of the Second World War (along with all other hotels in the park) and the park was unprepared for the huge number of visitors in 1946.

Late on August 17, 1959, the Old Faithful Inn was shaken by the Hebgen Lake earthquake, which collapsed the dining room fireplace chimney and damaged the huge lobby fireplace, reducing the number of usable hearths from eight to two. The building was partially shaken loose from its foundations, and access to some of the upper levels had to be restricted due to safety concerns. There were no deaths or serious injuries at the Inn as a result of the earthquake. The dining room fireplace was finally rebuilt in 1985, but the outside portion of the lobby fireplace chimney was replaced with a single steel pipe, visible in many exterior photos.

In 1988, the inn was threatened by the North Fork Fire, in which approximately 36 percent of the park was affected. It was saved by the actions of firefighters, volunteers, and a rooftop sprinkler system installed the previous year.

The high-range rooms in the East and West wing additions were renovated in 1993 and 1994. In celebration of the Inn's centennial in 2004, a major renovation project of the original "Old House" started construction, with completion in 2008. The project brought the Inn to current building codes and installed new electrical, plumbing, and heating systems, as well as structural upgrades. Finishes were cleaned and restored, maintaining as much of the historic material as possible. Wood and wool floor finishes, bathroom tile and fixtures, new replica historic hardware, and an interpretation of the original lavatory stands and basins by Charles Limbert were installed. Original elements including the recessing of the floor and hearth of the large fireplace in the main lobby and reconstruction of log walls removed in the lobby corrected modifications and changes over the years and brought the Inn back to match more closely Reamer's original design.

Presidential visitors
Its notable visitors are numerous, even preceding its construction. Chester A. Arthur camped outside the East Wing area in 1883, Theodore Roosevelt visited the site in 1903, Warren Harding stayed in 1923, Calvin Coolidge in 1927, and Franklin Roosevelt in the fall of 1937.

Christmas in August
According to park lore, a freak blizzard struck the Old Faithful Inn on August 25 sometime in the early twentieth century. Rather than lament the fact that they were isolated, the guests were said to have taken the opportunity to celebrate Christmas in August.

In popular culture

 * The Old Faithful Inn was featured in the 1936 film Yellowstone.

Influences
The Old Faithful Inn had a pronounced effect on the built environment in North American national parks, influencing the development of the National Park Service Rustic style that became widespread during the 1920s. Although it was not the first hotel with a multi-story lobby, the concept became widespread in the mid-20th century in urban hotels. In 2007 the Old Faithful Inn was selected as number 36 on a list of the 150 favorite buildings in the United States in a poll by the American Institute of Architects.

Historic designations
The Old Faithful Inn was placed on the National Register of Historic Places on July 23, 1973. It was designated a National Historic Landmark on May 28, 1987. It is the central element in the Old Faithful Historic District, which includes the Old Faithful Lodge on the other side of Old Faithful. The Lodge, which was designed by Gilbert Stanley Underwood to provide dining and guest services to a community of tent cabins, is lower and more understated in nature, but compatibly rustic.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Old Faithful Inn


text:
Shame

Shame is an unpleasant self-conscious emotion often associated with negative self-evaluation; motivation to quit; and feelings of pain, exposure, distrust, powerlessness, and worthlessness.

Definition
Shame is a discrete, basic emotion, described as a moral or social emotion that drives people to hide or deny their wrongdoings. Moral emotions are emotions that have an influence on a person's decision-making skills and monitors different social behaviors. The focus of shame is on the self or the individual with respect to a perceived audience. It can bring about profound feelings of deficiency, defeat, inferiority, unworthiness, or self-loathing. Our attention turns inward; we isolate from our surroundings and withdraw into closed-off self-absorption. Not only do we feel alienated from others but also from the healthy parts of ourselves. The alienation from the world is replaced with painful emotions and self-deprecating thoughts and inner anguish. Empirical research demonstrates that it is dysfunctional for the individual and group level. Shame can also be described as an unpleasant self-conscious emotion that involves negative evaluation of the self. Shame can be a painful emotion that is seen as a "...comparison of the self's action with the self's standards..." but may equally stem from comparison of the self's state of being with the ideal social context's standard. According to Neda Sedighimornani, shame is relevant in several psychological disorders such as depression, phobia of social interactions, and even some eating disorders. Some scales of shame measure it to assess emotional states, whereas other shame scales are used to assess emotional traits or dispositions- shame proneness. "To shame" generally means to actively assign or communicate a state of shame to another person. Behaviors designed to "uncover" or "expose" others are sometimes used to place shame on the other person. Whereas, having shame means to maintain a sense of restraint against offending others (as with modesty, humility, and deference). In contrast to having shame is to have no shame; behaving without restraint, offending others, similar to other emotions like pride or hubris.

Identification and self-evaluation
Nineteenth-century scientist Charles Darwin described shame affect in the physical form of blushing, confusion of mind, downward cast eyes, slack posture, and lowered head; Darwin noted these observations of shame affect in human populations worldwide, as mentioned in his book "The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals". Darwin also mentions how the sense of warmth or heat, associated with the vasodilation of the face and skin, can result in an even greater sense of shame. More commonly, the act of crying can be associated with shame.

When people feel shame, the focus of their evaluation is on the self or identity. Shame is a self-punishing acknowledgment of something gone wrong. It is associated with "mental undoing". Studies of shame showed that when ashamed people feel that their entire self is worthless, powerless, and small, they also feel exposed to an audience—real or imagined—that exists purely for the purpose of confirming that the self is worthless. Shame and the sense of self is stigmatized, or treated unfairly, like being overtly rejected by parents in favor of siblings' needs, and is assigned externally by others regardless of one's own experience or awareness. An individual who is in a state of shame will assign the shame internally from being a victim of the environment, and the same is assigned externally, or assigned by others regardless of one's own experience or awareness.

A "sense of shame" is the feeling known as guilt but "consciousness" or awareness of "shame as a state" or condition defines core/toxic shame (Lewis, 1971; Tangney, 1998). The person experiencing shame might not be able to, or perhaps simply will not, identify their emotional state as shame, and there is an intrinsic connection between shame and the mechanism of denial. " The key emotion in all forms of shame is contempt (Miller, 1984; Tomkins, 1967). Two realms in which shame is expressed are the consciousness of self as bad and self as inadequate. People employ negative coping responses to counter deep rooted, associated sense of "shameworthiness". The shame cognition may occur as a result of the experience of shame affect or, more generally, in any situation of embarrassment, dishonor, disgrace, inadequacy, humiliation, or chagrin.

Shame, devaluation and their interrelationship are similar across cultures, prompting some researchers to suggest that there is a universal human psychology of cultural valuation and devaluation.

Behavioural expression
Physiological symptoms caused by the autonomic nervous system include blushing, perspiration, dizziness, or nausea. A feeling of paralysis, numbness, or loss of muscle tone might set in making it difficult to think, act, or talk. Children often visibly slump and hang their head. In an effort to hide this reaction, adults are more likely to laugh, stare, avoid eye contact, freeze their face, tighten their jaw, or show a look of contempt. In another's presence, there's a feeling of being strange, naked, transparent, or exposed, as if wanting to disappear or hide. The Shame Code was developed to capture behavior as it unfolds in real time during the socially stressful and potentially shaming spontaneous speech task and was coded into the following categories: (1) Body Tension, (2) Facial Tension, (3) Stillness, (4) Fidgeting, (5) Nervous Positive Affect, (6) Hiding and Avoiding, (7) Verbal Flow and Uncertainty, and (8) Silence. Shame tendencies were associated with more fidgeting and less freezing, but both stillness and fidgeting were social cues that convey distress to the observer and may elicit less harsh responses. Thus, both may be an attempt to diminish further shaming experiences. Shame involves global, self-focused negative attributions based on the anticipated, imagined, or real negative evaluations of others and is accompanied by a powerful urge to hide, withdraw, or escape from the source of these evaluations. These negative evaluations arise from transgressions of standards, rules, or goals and cause the individual to feel separate from the group for which these standards, rules, or goals exist, resulting in one of the most powerful, painful, and potentially destructive experiences known to humans.

Comparison with other emotions
The boundaries between concepts of shame, guilt, and embarrassment are not easily delineated. They are all similar reactions or emotions in the fact that they are self-conscious, "implying self-reflection and self-evaluation."

Comparison with guilt
According to cultural anthropologist Ruth Benedict, shame arises from a violation of cultural or social values while guilt feelings arise from violations of one's internal values. Thus shame arises when one's 'defects' are exposed to others, and results from the negative evaluation (whether real or imagined) of others; guilt, on the other hand, comes from one's own negative evaluation of oneself, for instance, when one acts contrary to one's values or idea of one's self. Shame is more attributed to internal characteristics and guilt is more attributed to behavioral characteristics. Thus, it might be possible to feel ashamed of thought or behavior that no one actually knows about (because one is afraid of what they find), and conversely, feeling guilty about the act of gaining approval from others.

Psychoanalyst Helen B. Lewis argued that, "The experience of shame is directly about the self, which is the focus of evaluation. In guilt, the self is not the central object of negative evaluation, but rather the thing done is the focus." Similarly, Fossum and Mason say in their book Facing Shame that "While guilt is a painful feeling of regret and responsibility for one's actions, shame is a painful feeling about oneself as a person."

Following this line of reasoning, Psychiatrist Judith Lewis Herman concludes that "Shame is an acutely self-conscious state in which the self is 'split,' imagining the self in the eyes of the other; by contrast, in guilt the self is unified."

Clinical psychologist Gershen Kaufman's view of shame is derived from that of affect theory, namely that shame is one of a set of instinctual, short-duration physiological reactions to stimulation. In this view, guilt is seen as a learned behavior consisting primarily of self-directed blame or contempt, and the shame that results from this behavior, making up a part of the overall experience of guilt. Here, self-blame and self-contempt mean the application, towards (a part of) one's self, of exactly the same dynamic that blaming of, and contempt for, others represents when it is applied interpersonally.

Kaufman saw that mechanisms such as blame or contempt may be used as a defending strategy against the experience of shame and that someone who has a pattern of applying them to himself may well attempt to defend against a shame experience by applying self-blame or self-contempt. This, however, can lead to an internalized, self-reinforcing sequence of shame events for which Kaufman coined the term "shame spiral". Shame can also be used as a strategy when feeling guilty, especially when the hope is to avoid punishment by inspiring compassion.

Comparison with embarrassment
One view of difference between shame and embarrassment says that shame does not necessarily involve public humiliation while embarrassment does; that is, one can feel shame for an act known only to oneself but to be embarrassed one's actions must be revealed to others. In the field of ethics (moral psychology, in particular), however, there is debate as to whether or not shame is a heteronomous emotion, i.e., whether or not shame does involve recognition on the part of the ashamed that they have been judged negatively by others.

Another view of the dividing line between shame and embarrassment holds that the difference is one of intensity. In this view embarrassment is simply a less intense experience of shame. It is adaptive and functional. Extreme or toxic shame is a much more intense experience and one that is not functional. In fact, according to this view, toxic shame can be debilitating. The dividing line then is between functional and dysfunctional shame. This includes the idea that shame has a function or benefit for the organism.

Immanuel Kant and his followers held that shame is heteronomous (comes from others); Bernard Williams and others have argued that shame can be autonomous (comes from oneself). Shame may carry the connotation of a response to something that is morally wrong whereas embarrassment is the response to something that is morally neutral but socially unacceptable. Another view of shame and guilt is that shame is a focus on self, while guilt is a focus on behavior. Simply put: A person who feels guilt is saying "I did something bad.", while someone who feels shame is saying "I am bad".

Embarrassment has occasionally been viewed as a less severe or intense form of shame, which usually varies on different aspects such as intensity, the physical reaction of the person, or the size of the present social audience, but it is distinct from shame in that it involves a focus on the self-presented to an audience rather than the entire self. It is experienced as a sense of fluster and slight mortification resulting from a social awkwardness that leads to a loss of esteem in the eyes of others. Embarrassment has been characterized as a sudden-onset sense of fluster and mortification that results when the self is evaluated negatively because one has committed, or anticipates committing, a gaffe or awkward performance before an audience. So, because shame is focused on the entire self, those who become embarrassed apologize for their mistake, and then begin to repair things and this repair involves redressing harm done to the presented self.

One view of difference between shame and embarrassment says that shame does not necessarily involve public humiliation while embarrassment does; that is, one can feel shame for an act known only to oneself but to be embarrassed one's actions must be revealed to others. Therefore shame can only be experienced in private and embarrassment can never be experienced in private. In the field of ethics (moral psychology, in particular), however, there is debate as to whether or not shame is a heteronomous emotion, i.e. whether or not shame does involve recognition on the part of the ashamed that they have been judged negatively by others. This is a mature heteronomous type of shame where the agent does not judge herself negatively, but, due to the negative judgments of others, suspects that she may deserve negative judgment, and feel shame on this basis. Therefore, shame may carry the connotation of a response to something that is morally wrong whereas embarrassment is the response to something that is morally neutral but socially unacceptable.

Robert Karen's types of shame
Psychologist Robert Karen identified four categories of shame: existential, situational, class, and narcissistic. Existential shame occurs when we become self-aware of an objective, unpleasant truth about ourselves or our situation. Situational shame is the feeling we have when violating an ethical principle, interpersonal boundary, or cultural norm. Class shame relates to social power and pertains to skin color, social class, ethnic background, and gender and occurs in societies that have rigid caste stratifications or disparate classes. Narcissistic shame occurs when our self-image and pride are wounded, affecting how we feel and think about ourselves as an individual, in contrast as a member of a group.

Joseph Burgo's shame paradigms
There are many different reasons that people might feel shame. According to Joseph Burgo, there are four different aspects of shame. He calls these aspects of shame paradigms.

 * Unrequited love: "Unreciprocated love that causes yearning for more complete love."
 * Unwanted exposure: Something personal that we would like to keep private is unexpectedly revealed, or when we make a mistake in [a] public [setting]."
 * Disappointed expectation: "The feeling of dissatisfaction that follows the failure of expectations or hopes to manifest."
 * Exclusion: Being left out of connection or involvement with others or groups that we would like to belong to.

In his first subdivision of shame he looks into is unrequited love; which is when you love someone but your partner does not reciprocate, or one is rejected by somebody that they like; this can be mortifying and shaming. Unrequited love can be shown in other ways as well. For example, the way a mother treats her new born baby. An experiment called "The Still Face Experiment" was done where a mother showed her baby love and talked to the baby for a set period of time. She then went a few minutes without talking to the baby. This resulted with the baby making different expressions to get the mother's attention. When the mother stopped giving the baby attention, the baby felt shame. According to research on unrequited love, people tend to date others who are similar in attractiveness, leaving those less attractive to feel an initial disappointment that creates a type of unrequited love in the person. The second type of shame is unwanted exposure. This would take place if you were called out in front of a whole class for doing something wrong or if someone saw you doing something you did not want them to see. This is what you would normally think of when you hear the word shame. Disappointed expectation would be your third type of shame according to Burgo. This could be not passing a class, having a friendship go wrong, or not getting a big promotion in a job that you thought you would get. The fourth and final type of shame according to Burgo is exclusion which also means being left out. Many people will do anything to just fit in or want to belong in society, e.g., at school, work, friendships, relationships, everywhere.

Other subtypes

 * Genuine shame: is associated with genuine dishonor, disgrace, or condemnation.
 * False shame: is associated with false condemnation as in the double bind form of false shaming; "he brought what we did to him upon himself". Author and TV personality John Bradshaw calls shame the "emotion that lets us know we are finite".
 * Secret shame: describes the idea of being ashamed to be ashamed, so causing ashamed people to keep their shame a secret. Psychiatrist James Gilligan discovered, while working as a prison psychiatrist, that violence is primarily caused by secret shame. Gilligan stated, "...so intense and so painful that it threatens to overwhelm him and bring about the death of the self, cause him to lose his mind, his soul, or his sacred honor"
 * Internalized shame: Internalization of shame was first coined by Gershen Kaufman. In contrast to an acute short-lived experience of shame, internalized shame reflects deep-seated beliefs of inadequacy that feel permanent and irreversible and are accompanied by words, voices, and images. Internalized shame stems from chronic or less frequent severe experiences of shame occurring with prior trauma or in childhood. It can take over a child's emotions and identity and continue into adulthood or may gradually increase over time. Once internalized, the original shaming event(s) and beliefs need not be recalled nor be conscious. Later experiences of shame are intensified and last longer. They do not require an external event or another person to trigger associated feelings and thoughts and can cause depression and feelings of hopelessness and despair. It also causes "shame anxiety," which makes people apprehensive about experiencing shame.
 * Slut-shaming
 * Tech shame: describes the shame that employees, particularly younger workers, feel when they have challenges utilizing technology at work.
 * Toxic shame: describes false, pathological shame. It was coined by Sylvan Tomkins in the early 60s. John Bradshaw states that toxic shame is induced, inside children, by all forms of child abuse. Incest and other forms of child sexual abuse can cause particularly severe toxic shame. Toxic shame often induces what is known as complex trauma in children who cannot cope with toxic shaming as it occurs and who dissociate the shame until it is possible to cope with.
 * Vicarious shame: refers to the experience of shame on behalf of another person. Individuals vary in their tendency to experience vicarious shame, which is related to neuroticism and to the tendency to experience personal shame. Extremely shame-prone people might even experience vicarious shame even to an increased degree, in other words: shame on behalf of another person who is already feeling shame on behalf of a third party (or possibly on behalf of the individual proper).

Narcissism
It has been suggested that narcissism in adults is related to defenses against shame and that narcissistic personality disorder is connected to shame as well. According to psychiatrist Glen Gabbard, NPD can be broken down into two subtypes, a grandiose, arrogant, thick-skinned "oblivious" subtype and an easily hurt, oversensitive, ashamed "hypervigilant" subtype. The oblivious subtype presents for admiration, envy, and appreciation a grandiose self that is the antithesis of a weak internalized self which hides in shame, while the hypervigilant subtype neutralizes devaluation by seeing others as unjust abusers.

Depression
Another form of mental illness where shame is one of the most notable symptoms is depression. In a meta-analytic review performed in 2011, it was found that there were stronger associations with shame and depression than with guilt and depression. External shame, or a negative view of the self, seen through other people, had larger effect sizes correlated with depression than did internal shame. There are different degrees or levels of symptoms of shame in depression depending on different cultures. Those who show greater symptoms of shame in depression usually live in more socio-economic cultures.

Social aspects
According to the anthropologist Ruth Benedict, cultures may be classified by their emphasis on the use of either shame (a shame society) or guilt to regulate the social activities of individuals.

Shame may be used by those people who commit relational aggression and may occur in the workplace as a form of overt social control or aggression. Shaming is used in some societies as a type of punishment, shunning, or ostracism. In this sense, "the real purpose of shaming is not to punish crimes but to create the kind of people who don't commit them".

Stigma
In 1963, Erving Goffman published Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. For Goffman, the condition when a particular person is excluded from full societal reception is greatly discrediting. This negative evaluation may be "felt" or "enacted". Thus, stigma can occur when society labels someone as tainted, less desirable, or handicapped. When felt, it refers to the shame associated with having a condition and the fear of being discriminated against... when enacted it refers to actual discrimination of this kind. Shame in relation to stigma studies have most often come from the sense and mental consequences that young adolescents find themselves trapped in when they are deciding to use a condom in STD or HIV protection. The other use of stigma and shame is when someone has a disease, such as cancer, where people look to blame something for their feelings of shame and circumstance of sickness. Jessica M. Sales et al. researched young adolescents ages 15–21 on whether they had used protection in the 14 days prior to coming in for the study. The answers showed implications of shame and stigma, which received an accommodating score. The scores, prior history of STDs, demographics, and psychosocial variables were put into a hierarchical regression model to determine probability of an adolescents chances of using protected sex in the future. The study found that the higher sense of shame and stigma the higher chance the adolescent would use protection in the future. This means that if a person is more aware of consequences, is more in-tune with themselves and the stigma (stereotypes, disgrace, etc.), they will be more likely to protect themselves. The study shows that placing more shame and stigma in the mind of people can be more prone to protecting themselves from the consequences that follow the action of unprotected sex.

HIV-related stigma from those who are born with HIV due to their maternal genetics have a proneness to shame and avoidant coping. David S. Bennett et al. studied the ages 12–24 of self-reported measures of potential risk factors and three domains of internalizing factors: depression, anxiety, and PTSD. The findings suggested that those who had more shame-proneness and more awareness of HIV-stigma had a greater amount of depressive and PTSD symptoms. This means that those who have high HIV-stigma and shame do not seek help from interventions. Rather, they avoid the situation that could cause them to find themselves in a predicament of other mental health issues. Older age was related to greater HIV-related stigma and the female gender was more related to stigma and internalizing symptoms (depression, anxiety, PTSD). Stigma was also associated with greater shame-proneness.

Chapple et al. researched people with lung cancer in regards to the shame and stigma that comes from the disease. The stigma that accompanies lung cancer is most commonly caused by smoking. However, there are many ways to contract lung cancer, therefore those who did not receive lung cancer from smoking often feel shame; blaming themselves for something they did not do. The stigma effects their opinions of themselves, while shame is found to blame other cancer causing factors (tobacco products/anti-tobacco products) or ignoring the disease in avoidant coping altogether. The stigma associated with lung cancer effected relationships of patients with their family members, peers, and physicians who were attempting to provide comfort because the patients felt shame and victimized themselves.

Shame campaign
A shame campaign is a tactic in which particular individuals are singled out because of their behavior or suspected crimes, often by marking them publicly, such as Hester Prynne in Nathaniel Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter. In the Philippines, Alfredo Lim popularized such tactics during his term as mayor of Manila. On July 1, 1997, he began a controversial "spray paint shame campaign" in an effort to stop drug use. He and his team sprayed bright red paint on two hundred squatter houses whose residents had been charged, but not yet convicted, of selling prohibited substances. Officials of other municipalities followed suit. Former Senator Rene A. Saguisag condemned Lim's policy. Communists in the 20th century used struggle sessions to handle corruption and other problems.

Public humiliation, historically expressed by confinement in stocks and in other public punishments may occur in social media through viral phenomena.

Research
Psychologists and other researchers who study shame use validated psychometric testing instruments to determine whether or how much a person feels shame. Some of these tools include the Guilt and Shame Proneness (GASP) Scale, the Shame and Stigma Scale (SSS), the Experience of Shame Scale, and the Internalized Shame Scale. Some scales are specific to the person's situation, such as the Weight- and Body-Related Shame and Guilt scale (WEB-SG), the HIV Stigma Scale for people living with HIV and the Cataldo Lung Cancer Stigma Scale (CLCSS) for people with lung cancer. Others are more general, such as the Emotional Reactions and Thoughts Scale, which deals with anxiety, depression, and guilt as well as shame.

Treatments
There has been little research performed on treatment options concerning shame and people who experience this negative, despairing emotion. Different scientific approaches concerning a treatment have been put forward, using components of psychodynamic and cognitive-behavioral precepts. Unfortunately, the effectiveness of these approaches is not known because the studies have not been run or looked at in depth. An example of treatment for shame consists of group-based CBT and Compassion Focused Therapy, which patients report have helped them feel connectedness and encouraged to overcome difficult challenges related to shame.

Empathy
Brene Brown explains that shame (using a metaphor of a petri-dish) only needs three things to grow: secrecy, silence, and judgement. Shame cannot grow or thrive, in the context (or supportive environment) of empathy. It is important, that when reaching out for a supportive or empathetic person (i.e. when reaching out to share a story or experience): that we choose the people who have earned the right to hear our story (i.e. someone trustworthy); share with people with whom we have a relationship that can bear the weight of the story.

title: Shame


text:
Live with Kelly and Mark

Live with Kelly and Mark (or simply Live) is an American syndicated morning talk show hosted by married couple Kelly Ripa and Mark Consuelos. Executive produced by Michael Gelman, the Live with... show formula has aired under various hosts since 1983 locally on WABC-TV in New York City and 1988 nationwide. , it is produced by WABC.

With roots in A.M. Los Angeles and A.M. New York, Live began as The Morning Show, hosted by Regis Philbin and Cyndy Garvey; the show rose to national prominence as Live with Regis and Kathie Lee when Philbin was joined by Kathie Lee Gifford. The franchise has had longstanding success and has won the Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Talk Show and Outstanding Talk Show Hosts. Since April 2023, the show has been hosted by Ripa and her husband, Mark Consuelos. Prior to Consuelos, Ripa previously co-hosted the show with Philbin, Michael Strahan, and Ryan Seacrest.

Concept
Executive producer Michael Gelman said in 1993, "The real concept of the show, in a symbolic sense, is that they are husband and wife. They have their coffee mugs and they're chit-chatting about what's going on." It is the basis of the show's signature "Host Chat", an unscripted on-air conversation between the co-hosts that opens each show. Following Host Chat is a trivia segment in which the show telephones a home viewer, who must answer a question (usually about a guest on a recent show) to win a vacation for themselves and a door prize for a member of the studio audience. Shortly before the COVID-19 pandemic, the hosts started playing a new game with the contestant before the trivia question, wherein the caller gives the host two statements, one true and one false. If the hosts are stumped, the caller wins a "Live with Kelly and Mark" mug. The show then continues with interviews with celebrity guests, musical performances, and other recurring segments, including regular features showcasing fashion, food, health, and lifestyle topics.

The husband and wife breakfast chat program was popular in old time radio, beginning with Ed and Pegeen Fitzgerald, and later Dick Kollmar and Dorothy Kilgallen and Tex McCrary and Jinx Falkenburg. Parodied by Woody Allen in his film Radio Days, these programs were popular locally in New York, and Philbin would have heard them in his youth.

The format of Live! has been emulated by other successful talk shows such as the British programmes This Morning and Today with Des and Mel. However, it has also proven to be resilient against similarly formatted talk shows from other syndicators or networks, seeing programs such as George & Alana, Donny & Marie, Living It Up! with Ali & Jack, The Morning Show with Mike and Juliet, and Anderson Live all launch and end in short periods of time throughout its entire run, and fail to make any headway in the traditional 9 a.m. local time slot Live! has been traditionally slotted in for most markets.

The show is broadcast live from New York City, on weekdays at 9 a.m. for stations in the Eastern Time Zone, and is tape-delayed for the rest of the country. Although the program is generally associated with the ABC network and airs on all ABC owned-and-operated stations, in many markets the program is syndicated to stations affiliated with other networks. Live did not air in a morning timeslot on all ABC-owned stations until September 2013, as WLS-TV in Chicago programmed the 9 a.m. timeslot with The Oprah Winfrey Show---WLS-TV was the originating station for Oprah in the 1980s---and then with Windy City Live after Oprah concluded its run in 2011. Although WLS-TV had carried the New York-based Live in an overnight timeslot earlier in its run, the show aired on other Chicago stations, including WGN-TV from 2002 through 2013.

Recurring segments
Guinness World Record Breaker Week, New York Auto Show Week, Broadway Week, and Top Teacher Week are examples of features frequently visited on the show, highlighting a different aspect of the theme everyday that week. Live will also invite "whiz kids" to oppose the co-hosts at spelling, athletics, mathematics, sport stacking, and technology, among other tasks. A recurring gag with Philbin as co-host was him challenging seniors—preferably over the age of 100—at tennis, basketball, ping-pong, and bowling, for example. Regular contributors to the show include toy enthusiast Chris Byrne, style maven Lawrence Zarian, animal expert Peter Gros, automotive expert Alan Taylor, pediatrician Greg Yapalater, home and gardening show host Katie Brown, technology specialist Leo Laporte, entrepreneur Carley Roney, Science Bob, veterinarian Jennifer Jellison, and nutrition expert Wendy Bazilian.

Specials
The show has hosted a number of specials over the years since it began. Specials have included a Halloween celebration in which the co-hosts wore dozens of costumes and portrayed some of the most famous and infamous names in pop culture.

In February 2011, Live threw a wedding for a couple who wrote in with reasons why they should be married on the show. Viewer submissions have also been accepted for their "Moms Dream Come True Special", where the co-hosts pay tribute to a select group of mothers. The show has aired a Post-Oscar special the day after the awards ceremony live from the Dolby Theatre in Hollywood.

On location
Live has been to eight countries and nearly 25 states, logging 200000 mi. The list of remotes includes Tampa, Hawaii, Monaco, Banff, San Antonio, Aspen, Walt Disney World, New Orleans, Disneyland, Las Vegas, San Francisco, Paris, Detroit, Chicago, The Bronx, Los Angeles, the USS Intrepid, Minneapolis–Saint Paul, Maui, Prince Edward Island, London, Scottsdale, the White House, Charlotte, Churchill Downs, Niagara Falls, Puerto Rico, Marina del Rey, Philadelphia, Branson, Mount Rushmore, The Bahamas, and the Dolby Theatre's set for the 85th Academy Awards.

Co-host timeline
{{legend|#9EFF9E|Main co-host}} {{legend|#FFC7C7|Recurring co-host}} {{legend|#bfd|Guest co-host}} {{legend|#FFB|Segment guest}}

1983–1988: The Morning Show
The Morning Show, co-hosted by Regis Philbin and Cyndy Garvey, premiered locally on WABC-TV in New York on April 4, 1983. In 1984, Garvey left the show and Philbin hired Ann Abernathy, whom he remembered from his time at KABC for her engaging personality, to assume the co-host duties. After Abernathy got married and decided to return to Los Angeles, Kathie Lee Johnson (later Gifford) joined Philbin officially on June 24, 1985. Their chemistry proved to be successful as The Morning Show soon became number 1 in the market and went on to debut in national syndication on September 5, 1988, when the title was changed to Live with Regis and Kathie Lee.

1988–2000: Live with Regis and Kathie Lee
Early on, Live matched its local success with impressive national ratings and established itself as a dominant fixture in American television. Entertainment Weekly described Regis Philbin and Kathie Lee Gifford as "an agreeable mismatch" and their famous banter as "playful, edgy, and amusing." Gifford's positivity throughout public scandals such as the 1996 accusation that her clothing line was being run under sweatshop conditions and her husband Frank Gifford's 1997 affair with a flight attendant resonated with the female demographic of the show, but ultimately made her a media target prompting her emotional departure on July 28, 2000. "Over a third of my life has been [at Live]," she said. "This is family. It is been an amazing journey." Gifford appeared on ''Live! with Regis and Kelly on three occasions, for the show's 20th Anniversary special on September 14, 2007, to promote her book Just When I Thought I'd Dropped My Last Egg: Life and Other Calamities'' on April 14, 2009, and again as a guest to bid farewell to Philbin on his second to last show, November 17, 2011. Gifford went on to host the fourth hour of Today with Hoda Kotb; that show mainly airs an hour after Live! in most markets, though a few markets where both shows air at 10:00 a.m. against each other do exist.

2000–2001: Live with Regis
When looking for Gifford's replacement, Philbin and executive producer Michael Gelman teamed Philbin with a handful of potential co-hosts, including Joy Philbin, Kathleen Murphy, Rosie O'Donnell, Jann Carl, Whoopi Goldberg, Kathy Fountain, Gloria Estefan, Jillian Reynolds, Lisa Rinna, Caroline Rhea, and Suzanne Sena. This met with positive fan response and a 26 percent ratings increase. Philbin won his first Daytime Emmy Award for Live during this period. Ripa auditioned four months into the search, on November 1, 2000. Three months later, on the morning of February 5, 2001, Philbin officially announced that Ripa would replace Gifford as his new permanent co-host.

2001–2011: Live! with Regis and Kelly
Ripa's co-hosting duties began the following week, on February 12, 2001. The young-audience demographic of ''Live! with Regis and Kelly increased by 80 percent, with Ripa credited by major outlets such as the Chicago Tribune and Entertainment Weekly'' for bringing a new life to the show (dubbed "the Ripa effect"). Seven months into Philbin's and Ripa's run, the September 11 attacks on the United States occurred, with coverage beginning twelve minutes before that day's episode would have started. The show was pre-empted for a week following the attacks and returned September 18, 2001.

Together they hosted the annual Disney Parks Christmas Day Parade during this era. In 2009, when Philbin underwent hip surgery, Nick Cannon replaced him as the host for that year's Christmas special. Ryan Seacrest also took Philbin's place on occasion. Ripa later had a stress fracture, which made it necessary for her to host the show on crutches. At times Maria Menounos filled in for Ripa, who was elsewhere on assignment for the show.

Shortly after celebrating his and Ripa's 10th anniversary together, Philbin announced on January 18, 2011, that he would leave Live!. The show then held a "Regis Farewell Celebration Season", showcasing Philbin's top moments from his 28 years on the program, 1983–2011. His final show aired November 18, 2011.

''Live! with Regis and Kelly'' won two Daytime Emmy Awards during its run.

2011–2012: Live! with Kelly (first era)
After Philbin's departure, the show was renamed ''Live! with Kelly''. Joining Ripa were various co-hosts from broadcasting and entertainment. On November 21, 2011, Jerry Seinfeld was the first of 60 men and women to join Ripa at the co-host desk: Reggie Bush, Kyle MacLachlan, Russell Brand, Howie Mandel, Carl Edwards, Chris Harrison, Daniel Radcliffe, Michael Buckley, Michael Catherwood, Rob Lowe, Martin Short, Neil Patrick Harris, Peter Facinelli, Boomer Esiason, Ben Mulroney, Dan Abrams, Rob Thomas, David Duchovny, Pat Kiernan, Derek Hough, D. L. Hughley, Jesse Palmer, Carson Kressley, Carrie Ann Inaba, Mark Feuerstein, Jim Parsons, Nick Lachey, Jonah Hill, Michael Strahan, Apolo Anton Ohno, Joel McHale, Cat Deeley, Tyler Perry, Andy Cohen, Alec Baldwin, Josh Groban, Jerry O'Connell, Seth Meyers, Mike Greenberg, Kristin Chenoweth, Andy Samberg, Mark Consuelos, Lucy Liu, Taye Diggs, Randy Jackson, Mario Lopez, Matthew Broderick, Mary J. Blige, Ed Robertson, Michael Bublé, Matthew Morrison, Kevin Jonas, Tony Potts, Dana Carvey, Jimmy Kimmel, Kim Kardashian, L.A. Reid, Bryant Gumbel, Daniel Dae Kim, Jussie Smollett, and Sam Champion.

In April 2012, Live! debuted a new set described as a "contemporary downtown-style loft, spacious and yet maintaining the studio's warmth and intimacy." It was the first major set re-design since the start of the show's 10th season in national syndication (1997–98).

In July 2012, People magazine reported that Meyers, Groban, and Strahan were the top three contenders to replace Philbin.

2012–2016: Live with Kelly and Michael
On the September 4, 2012, episode, Michael Strahan made his 16th appearance on the show and was introduced as Ripa's permanent co-host. The former New York Giants defensive end had begun his TV career on Fox NFL Sunday, a job he said he would keep even though it shoots in Los Angeles. The Ripa-Strahan chemistry proved to be successful. Live With Kelly & Michael had been the No. 2 syndicated talk show averaging a 2.8 national rating over Strahan's entire tenure while Live With Regis & Kelly averaged a 2.6. Live With Kelly & Michael brought in 268,000 more audience members daily, on average, than the show attracted during the end of the Philbin run. On January 19, 2016, the show was renewed through at least the 2019–2020 season.

On April 19, 2016, it was announced that Strahan would leave Live to join Good Morning America full-time. The decision was revealed to the program's production staff just after that day's broadcast of Live, and officially announced on the program by Strahan the following day. Ripa, however, was absent from that day's episode, and ABC announced later in the day that Live would have guest co-hosts through April 25, 2016. Although speculated to have been a reaction to Strahan's abrupt exit, an ABC staff member stated to Variety that Ripa's sudden absence was a "pre-scheduled vacation".

Ripa returned on April 26, 2016, using the opening of the episode to address the reception to Strahan's exit, and ABC's continued commitment to Live as a series. She said she was annoyed that ABC had not given her advance notice of negotiations to move Strahan to GMA. Strahan's final episode on Live occurred on May 13, 2016, and featured several flashback moments from the four years that he co-hosted the show.

2016–2017: Live with Kelly (second era)
On May 16, 2016, Ripa began the second era of her Live career as a single host. Jimmy Kimmel joined her as her first guest co-host.

2017–2023: Live with Kelly and Ryan
On May 1, 2017, it was announced that Ryan Seacrest would succeed Strahan as the new permanent co-host, after a yearlong syndicated co-host search. Seacrest also joined as an executive producer to the show.

On September 5, 2017, Live updated the show's look with a new, modern logo, modifications to the studio, and a brand-new show opener.

In March 2020, the show began broadcasting remotely from the hosts' homes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. During this period, Philbin died on July 24. On August 26, 2020, it was announced that the 33rd season would premiere on September 7, with the show returning to its New York City studio the next day. The premiere did not have a studio audience and the hosts were seated six feet apart. Beginning with the 2020–21 season, Disney Media Distribution began to authorize the show's ABC affiliates to run the show a second time daily in an overnight timeslot, allowing late night viewers to watch the show or record it, even if it were pre-empted by breaking news.

2023–present: Live with Kelly and Mark
On February 16, 2023, Seacrest announced that he would be leaving Live in spring 2023, primarily due to the travel, as his primary residence is in Los Angeles, while the show tapes in New York City. Mark Consuelos, husband of Ripa, was announced as Seacrest's replacement. The final episode of Live with Kelly and Ryan aired on April 14, 2023. On April 17, the first episode of Live with Kelly and Mark premiered. The show currently airs live shows Mondays to Wednesdays, and pre-taped shows on Thursdays and Fridays.

Critical reception
The New York Daily News gave the program a positive review: "…When it comes to the amount and playfulness of morning talk, nothing beats Live." In 2001, 2011, 2012, 2015, and 2016 the show won the Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Talk Show Hosts and in its 24th year, after 21 nominations, it won the Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Talk Show. In addition, its co-hosts have received two TV Guide Award nominations for Favorite Daytime Talk Show and multiple People's Choice nominations for Favorite Talk Show Host.

According to daytime television ratings, viewership averages 5 million per episode, ranking #1 in all big markets, such as New York City, Pittsburgh, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, Dallas, San Francisco, and Miami. Dominating its time periods, Live is the top-rated morning show and regularly the #1 syndicated talk show.

title: Live with Kelly and Mark