Talk:List of The Prisoner episodes

Was '1st' Really Redundant?

I think a case can be made that, while the '1st' column was certainly redundant in terms of ordering, it still served a good purpose, in that one could quickly and easily check how each episode matches up against the original ordering by just looking across the columns. i.e. I can easily see that, after reordering to the '6 of 1' order, I can see that what is now the 2nd episode was originally aired as the 5th. Trying to look across at a date isn't useful at all. I'll be honest, I'm already loading up the past page that had the '1st' Column on it to do just this.
I make the motion to bring it back. Anyone agree/object?
Barmy Fotheringay-Phipps 05:25, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

McGoohan's seven episodes that "really count"

• What does this mean? When did McGoohan identify these episodes? What made them special? What is the source for this statement? 24.131.202.30 16:55, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I am not clear as to why you've posted this here, as I cannot find the statement in any of the existing messages on this page, but as I have said it on some other Prisoner-related Wiki talk pages, here goes. The source is Matthew White and Jaffer Ali's book, The Official Prisoner Companion, Warner Books, 1988 (and I feel certain that I've encountered it elsewhere, but my collection of P sources are not readily handy; off the top of my head, I suspect Dave Rogers' book). That was the phrase they attributed to McGoohan, with the addition that he would "toss the rest into the rubbish" (again, I think his--or their--exact words, but this time I won't guarantee that it's absolutely ver batim, but very close; certainly "rubbish" was used). As best as I can interpret this (White & Ali left it at that), he thought that these seven episodes are the core of the programme, and the rest were hacked out to fill the commitment to ITC and are worthless. Ted Watson 19:41, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I believe this was mentioned in the interview with Warner Troyer. I think it was originally something along the lines of "I thought the concept of the thing would sustain for only seven". There was a later, follow-up remark to Alain Carrazé and Hélene Oswald reprinted in "Le Prisonnier: (Huitième Art, 1989)": "There are seven I consider completely true to the concept. The others on occasion were stretching it a bit." I know that Prisoner Film Librarian Tony Sloman has his own opinion of which those seven are, based on his view of how much care, energy and enthusiasm that McGoohan had for the particular episode. I have a feeling that he named some, but not all of the seven. Simon Coward 09:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to remove this part of the list. While it does seem that McGoohan did endorse the idea of there being seven fundamental Prisoner episodes, he does not seem to have promoted a particular order for them (different fan groups list them in different orders, e.g. here) and according to at least one fan page, McGoohan denied that these particular seven are the ones he was thinking of. [1] So the whole thing appears rather dubious, and unsourced.RandomCritic (talk) 15:11, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Request to merge individual episodes

• Oppose. Star Trek and Doctor Who warrant individual episode articles, and the episodes of this series have been deeply studied and analysed. It would be a disservice to chop the articles down into bite-size pieces to fit this list. 23skidoo 17:32, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose per 23skidoo. -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:49, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

My apologies for saying this so late. I added the merge request. The article List of The Prisoner episodes is almost empty. It contains headings for every episode, but almost no text. I was inspired by the Episodes of Lost (season 2) article, where every episode is deeply studied and analysed.

In addition to that, I notice that in the The Prisoner article, there is a link to every episode, as stand-alone article. Does this mean that the List of The Prisoner episodes article is obsolete? --Pål Drange, 0909.1.march.2006

So-Called "Alternate Order"; plus Pre-empted for "Danger Man"?

There is no explanation in the text here as to what the alternate order along the right side of the template is supposed to be, or where it is from, or anything. In fact, one order that should be here but is not is the one that was the standard for many years. This was : "Arrival," "Chimes," "A,B,& C," "Free," "Schizoid," "General," "Returns," "Dance," "Forsake," "Funeral," "Checkmate," "Harmony," "Change of Mind," "Hammer," "Girl," "Once," and "Fall." (Anyone not able to understand those abbrs. does not know the series well enough to take part in this discussion). With the exception of the skipping of "Living in Harmony," it was the CBS-TV order (summers '68 & '69 and late at night 20 years later with "Harmony"), as well as that of the MCI video release and public TV showings. This is all USA, I admit, but some sources (e.g., the White & Ali book, 1988, referenced in the main article and others relevant to this programme) indicate this order has been used practically everywhere that the show was seen during the same period. Further note that it matches the initial UK sequence through #8, and that most of these same sources state that the latter portion of that original run was dictated by what was and was not yet completed. This is corroborated by the fact that, with the internally mandatory exception of "Once Upon a Time," the last four episodes shown are also the last four that were filmed, after the departures of George Markstein and many crew members (supposedly due to the reduction from 26 to 17 total episodes and the jettisoning of a break period) as reflected in the on-screen credits. This means that that order simply isn't all that important. So just what is the "alternate order" shown here and doesn't the "standard" one have, if anything, more right to be displayed than the original UK?

New point: So many sources have flatly stated that, to buy McGoohan time to write and film "Fall Out," the show was pre-empted for two consecutive weeks near the end, with the two "Danger Man/Secret Agent" episodes from that programme's aborted final season (both set in Japan and subsequently re-edited into a feature film, "Koroshi") filling in. This seems quite plausible, especially given statements attributed to the late Kenneth Griffith concerning the finale's shoot being so hurried that Pat asked him to write his own speech, yet no episode guide that specifies original UK airdates leaves such a gap, including this one. I've never encountered a source explicitly refuting this claim. The three variations are: it is said to have happened, nothing is said one way or another, nothing is said but given airdates don't allow for it to have happened. Can anybody here verify whether or not it actually did happen? Ted Watson 20:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry if being insistent offends anybody, but I feel that resolving the question of the "identity" of the so-called "alternate order" running down the right side of the template is mandatory. It does appear to be somebody 's idea of an internally chronological sequencing, but as the text above it acknowledges that there is no consensus on one such order, that works against it being posted anyway, even if attributed to a specific source, which it is not. Besides, the simple fact of the matter is that there are flat contradictions in the series that do not jibe and cannot be reconciled, making such an order therefore impossible. I also repeat that I feel that what was for so many years the standard order, one often attributed to ITC itself, should be posted. I beg someone to please respond. Ted Watson 19:53, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Additional orderings noted. Thank you very much. Now if only somebody could verify--one way or the other--the alleged preemption via Koroshi.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbrittreid (talk • contribs) 13:20, 27 June 2007

The list of airdates doesn't show any interruption, except for the lack of an episode on Christmas Eve 1967, which pushes the remaining six episodes back one week from when they might have been broadcast. IMDb says Koroshi was broadcast January 5, 1968, but I don't see how doing a couple episodes of Secret Agent buys McGoohan any time; rather, it adds to his to-do list. Asking on alt.tv.prisoner might turn up something, if the newsgroup is still active.

—wwoods 07:16, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

"...it adds to his to-do list." Huh? Do you mean to suggest that you think the two Danger Man episodes were made just then? Not so--They were done before official production work on The Prisoner began. During that shoot, Markstein mentioned the "spy resigns, gets kidnapped to resort-like prison, etc." scenario, which led to McG convincing Grade to cancel DM in favor of TP. We are talking about a pair of episodes that at this time were nearly (if not fully) two years old, which certainly would have bought Pat time to work on Fall Out. The question now is, given that this apparently didn't happen, how did it get reported as flat fact?

One other thing: In those additional orders, what is "1st," and how does KTEH (I presume a USA TV station) qualify? Ted Watson 20:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I put a key down at the bottom: "1st" is the original-air-date order. I included that so someone can get back to that order after resorting; clicking on the "Original Air Date" column puts "December 10" first and "October 8" last! We could save the width of the "1st" column if we changed the date format to YYYY-MM-DD, though I find that a bit harder to interpret. The "KTEH" order is sufficiently notable to be included in that FAQs, and is "reportedly approved by McGoohan."

—wwoods 14:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

One thing no-one's mentioned is that by the end of 1967 the UK Friday transmissions (i.e. those on ATV midlands and Grampian) were two episodes ahead of those by ATV London and the other regions which took The Prisoner on Sundays. This was a result of the latter companies' run skipping two Sundays: on 19th November for the Royal Variety Performance and 24th December because of the Christmas schedules. Now it may well be that production was running behind and the transmission of those two Danger Man episodes helped them catch up, but it could also be a way of bringing the different ITV regions more into line. Perhaps, fortuitously, it accomplished both. Anglia did much the same thing although they just showed feature films on the weeks between 'Harmony' and 'Girl'. By the way, Scottish TV had started airing the show six days later than ATV/Grampian and their run continued on consecutive Thursdays with just one forced break where they lost a whole day's broadcasting due to industrial action. As a result of ATV/Grampian losing two weeks to Koroshi, Scottish went from being six days behind at the start, to thirteen days behind after the strike, to one day ahead by the end.

Simon Coward (talk) 10:11, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

O.K., but isn't "1st" redundant, since that IS the order they are listed here, as indicated by the "airdate" column (that is why I didn't see that interpretation)? Do you mean that because of my query you added that key (I am certain it wasn't there when I first found the additional orders)? BTW, why no comment about the two DM episodes, either denying my reading of your comment or acknowledging that you had the timing (of when they were filmed) wrong? Ted Watson 20:19, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

But if you resort the list in, say, the "6 of 1" order, and then want to re-resort it back in the air-date order, you need that column. Sorting the list alphabetically by air date isn't interesting, though as I said, we could put the dates in numerical form and then it'd work.

I did put the key in when I made it a sortable table — check the diff.

I didn't have anything else to say about Danger Man; all I know is what you've said, and what I read in the FAQs.

—wwoods 21:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Once I found this list, I used it to go to a handful of the episodes that I check almost every day (before that, I clicked on links to them within the main series article), one of which is Fall Out at the very bottom, of course. Furthermore, when I found the extra orderings, I would swear I looked for a key to those headings. Given all this, I do not see how I could have missed it, but apparently I did--I am not even going to check that "diff" link to confirm it.

I am sorry but I can make no sense out of your first paragraph here. I said nothing about resorting the list, just that the one labelled "1st" among the orderings on the right is redundant given that by definition it is the same as the airdates to the left, and I meant simply that it should be removed, especially since you made some comment about limited space. Nor can I understand your phrase "alphabetically by air date," as these are, again by definition, two different things.

I just checked the linked "FAQs," specifically the Danger Man section, and he seems completely unaware that the 30 min. run and the 1 hour run are really two separate programmes. In the first, Drake is a(n apparently American) troubleshooter for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), while in the latter, he is an agent for a British intelligence organization called M-9 (not as some have written, "MI-9," unless in the real world's MI-5 and MI-6 the "I" is silent, and therefore may be here, as well). This is all fundamental and well-known, hence his credibility with me is low (he did include a disclaimer concerning an American bias, and could have easily had another about having limited knowledge of DM due to its peripheral relevance, but did not). Ted Watson 20:59, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh! A sortable table can be reordered by the reader. If you click the little dingus next to the column labels, you can resort it in ascending or descending order by that column. So readers can pick whichever order they prefer, or check the others and then go back.

—wwoods 21:43, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

A B C 1 2 Z 2 10 Y 3 1 X

{| class="wikitable sortable" ! A !! B !! C |- | 1 || 2 || Z |- | 2 || 10 || Y |- | 3 || 1 || X |}

Interesting, and I will set it to the order that I'm used to, the one I called "standard," thanks. But it still doesn't make any sense out of "alphabetically by air date" for me. I'm not even sure you were trying to. Sorry if I seem dense. Ted Watson 18:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

To me, the dates show as 'Month_Name Day, Year', e.g. "December 10, 1967", so sorting by that column gets me

December < February < January < November < October, which isn't anyone's idea of a sensible order. Perhaps you have your preferences set to a different date format?

—wwoods 15:22, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

My own preferences aren't at issue here. I just don't understand what you are trying to say. It keeps coming across gibberish. Let me make this clear: alphabetical order (i.e., using the initial letters of some words, presumably the episodes' titles) is one thing, original air date order (i.e., the chronological sequence in which somebody has telecast the series) is something completely different, yet you said "alphabetically by air date." If you are referring to alphabetizing by the names of the months in the airdates, that is at best an absolutely ludicrous concept and I have no idea why you would bring it up. Between that and the fact that your quoted phrasing is not the best way to communicate that idea, it didn't occur to me until just now. Since you did mention it, let me state my preference. I go with the order that---

1. The US network CBS ran them (except for ...Harmony) in the summers of 1968 & '69, and again in late night (with ...Harmony) circa 1990.

2. Many US public TV stations (but not necessarily PBS affiliates) ran them, beginning in early 1977, continuing throughout the 1980s and sporadically since.

3. MPI Home Video released them here.

This is the order that I gave in my post that launched this thread. One other thing: in your first post here, you said the original UK airdates shows only one interruption, Christmas Eve '67. Actually, 19 November is also skipped. Doesn't help the Koroshi thing, of course; just for the record, and so you don't make that mistake with somebody else and spread misinformation. Ted Watson 20:31, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Obviously I've failed to make myself clear... The table is now "sortable", which means a reader can reorder the rows by clicking on the little box in any of the column heads. Which gives him the opportunity to resort the list of episodes according to any of the suggested 'proper' orders. However, while the computer code is smart enough to put a column of numbers in the correct order (click on column "B" in the toy table above) it doesn't do as well with dates, so clicking on the "Original airdate (UK)" column sorts the list alphabetically by date. Which I found mildly amusing, even though, as I said, it "isn't anyone's idea of a sensible order".

As I understand it, it's possible to set Wikipedia to display linked dates in various formats: Go to the My preferences link at the top right of any page, and go on from there to Date and time. I haven't bothered to specify a preference myself, but I wondered if perhaps you had, and that was causing the confusion. That's what I meant by "your preferences"; nothing to do with your preferred viewing order.

—wwoods 08:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I see that I failed to make myself clear on one point---I do understand about the table here being sortable (after putting it in my preferred order, when I click on one episode title and go to its article, upon coming back it here reverts; so your argument for "needing that column" goes out the window). I had not checked that Preferences---thank you for pointing me to it. So when you said "alphabetically by date," you did indeed mean the absurdity I described? If so, why did you bring it up? Ted Watson 20:53, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Issue with opening section

In the opening section (the text preceding the list), the quotation marks around "their version" serve absolutely no legitimate purpose, and no purpose whatsoever as far as I can tell other than to highlight the obvious bias against A&E's list. I am about to edit the section in question to be less derogatory in the presentation of its one-sided argument. Strunkenwhite (talk) 17:33, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
P.S. Additionally, "citing that the original UK broadcast order as well as the aforementioned "time references" such as No. 6 telling other members of the Village that he is "new here"." leaves me concluding that someone edited out what A&E was citing about the original UK broadcast order, because as written that phrase is meaningless. Strunkenwhite (talk) 17:51, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Lumps of sugar

The question about the lumps of sugar in both Checkmate and The Chimes of Big Ben makes it clear that The Chimes of Big Ben should precede Checkmate, as number 6 alludes to The Chimes in Checkmate when this question is asked. And yet, none of the so-called critics appears to have picked up on this with their recommended ordering. That's a bit strange. Viriditas (talk) 06:05, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

You are mistaken. There is no tea in "Checkmate." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.3.99.18 (talk) 23:41, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Joanna Southcott?

Why is a significant portion of this page dedicated to an "unpublished" piece of analysis? Who is this "analyst" and why is she quoted here?
The Keymaster (talk) 09:43, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Cut the odd, extensive original research, attributed to “unpublished article” by 200-year-dead religious prophet Joanna Southcott, added to article 3 years ago by short-lived editor who promptly disappeared from Wikipedia. Jmg38 (talk) 02:34, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Six of One order and the Sci-Fi Channel marathon

The article's table of episodes and dates has a column indicating the Six of One order (correct, so far as I am aware) but accompanying text notes "The UK Sci Fi Channel marathon used a similar order, but with 'Dance of the Dead' preceding 'Free for All', and 'The General' preceding 'A. B. and C.'". No specific source is cited for this.

Six of One's "35th Prisoner Anniversary News Update" (undated but it accompanied the society's "Free For All" magazine dated Autumn 2002) notes with regard to the recent Sci-Fi channel marathon that, "As for order of episodes the standard positioning was only applied up to Dance of the Dead. Then came Forsake, followed by Funeral, Checkmate, Harmony, Change, Hammer and Girl (prior to the final two-parter)." In other words, this says that the channel followed the ITC order as listed in the table, and appears to have been written after the weekend in question (14 & 15 September 2002).

This sequence matches that in an advance listing in "Zap" magazine and is also partially confirmed by "Radio Times" which doesn't list all the episode titles, but lists enough to also contradict the claim that the Six of One order was used.

So where does the claim of the channel's use of the Six of One order originate, given that Six of One's own publication seems to refute it? Could there have been more than one Sci-Fi Channel marathon, one (or more) of which used a different episode order to the September 2002 one? Simon Coward (talk) 11:45, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

"the personal arrangement of"

Is there a reason why one "Zack Handlen" would warrant their own column here? The footnote goes to an AV Club page about Prisoner episodes, but certainly does not seem to provide a warrant for this inclusion.

It's hard to see why there should be ore than production order, original broadcast order, the order they are presented in in the consumer media sets, and perhaps in parallel the KTEH order (as compiled by a recognized axpert?).

Huw Powell (talk) 03:32, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, who is Zach Handlen and why does his order get included? Can I add a column for Capedia’s favorite order? Capedia (talk) 00:22, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Totally agree. Have replaced with The Unmutual Website's order, being that it's the world's largest Prisoner recource and the order is at least written by an published and respected author on the subject.

US Broadcast Order (and the Italian one!)

I have a question about the aforementioned order: in some sources, for example alt.tv.prisoner and the 2007 comments by Ted Watson in this discussion, the episodes are alleged to have been broadcast in the US in this order (I quote from Ted): "Arrival", "Chimes", "A,B,& C", "Free", "Schizoid", "General", "Returns", "Dance", "Forsake", "Funeral", "Checkmate", "Harmony", "Change of Mind", "Hammer", "Girl", "Once", and "Fall" (with the temporary exclusion of "Harmony"). However, the article refers that the US broadcast followed closely the UK version: what sources are available for this order?

(If you were interested in having a look, I recently fixed partially the Italian main article and the corresponding episode list: I worked on the issue of our local distribution (there would be a lot to fix also in the other sections, and unfortunately it would need a lot of time). The order of the first Italian broadcast is very different, but it's most likely it's just nonsensical...:) ) Laterale (talk) 21:56, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

The Official Prisoner Companion, by Mathew White and Jaffer Ali, page 143 agrees with that US order. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 01:02, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

The US order should probably be added as a column in the episode table (after the ITC column). Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 01:38, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

I'll add it now. Laterale (talk) 14:32, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Why add the US order, but not the order for any other country? (Apart from Britain.) HiLo48 (talk) 04:01, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

That is the only other one I have seen referenced. Others could be added. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 04:58, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

This fan site lists some additional orders. Is it a reliable source? Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 05:29, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Have added The Unmutual Website's order, being that it's the world's largest Prisoner resource and the order is at least written by an published and respected author on the subject. 89.168.196.221 (talk) 12:37, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

This frustrates me to no end

Sometimes I lay awake in the middle of the night wondering why there isn’t an authoritative order for the episodes. Surely by now, after all this time, some kind of consensus on the most accurate order should have been reached?? Viriditas (talk) 09:45, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Sir Quacky, Umutual, KTEH, and Prisoner US

I removed some IP's suggested order and the Prisoner US website, which seemed to be a non notable fan site. Also removed 'Unmutal'. No mater how popular a fan website, it's just opinion. Also removed KTEH, it was just one TV station out of thousands. Bkatcher (talk) 18:32, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm not a regular wikipedia editor, so I don't know the rules on notability around here. But I did like having the listing of different fan opinions on the episode order as I'm going through my first watch-through. It was a nice snapshot of fan opinions on the matter. Thankfully, the original listing is still currently available at the web archive for anyone who stumbles upon this note: https://web.archive.org/web/20221201232845/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_Prisoner_episodes TitusAtturi (talk) 18:05, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Or you can just look back a few edits. The problem with fan options is they can rapidly spiral out of control. We could easily wind up with 60 viewing options here. Best to leave it to The Prisoner fan sights. Bkatcher (talk) 03:38, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Worth therefore noting that the A&E order is also one fan's opinion (a certain Roger Langley, who did not consult anyone about his own order before telling A&E to use it, and his list has been widely criticised), so perhaps that should be culled too. Although, I do appreciate your other points. 89.168.220.246 (talk) 07:14, 9 May 2023 (UTC)