Crossword Help Forum
Forum Rules

A more enjoyable brush with Ifor (for me at least) but I'm unsure about what to enter for the first description to be written beneath the grid.
Do I replicate something I've seen on a device (which, obviously, I never use) or do I spell it out?

Not sure what you're alluding to here. I see the answer as two TV shows, one UK and one US.

Indeed, Buddy. The first space is the original first word, the second the parody, and the remainder the common part, I thought

Only know the UK one - took the other to be a different sort of 'double act' altogether (one that has an ''/'' in it). For two of the 'four' mentioned in the preamble I have a missing element for each of them - the others complete a title (by another name). I took the other 'double act' to be responsible for the differences.
Will search some US stuff later - not really looking forward to that, so if you'd drop a hint I'd appreciate it.
Must pop out now - will get back to you later (and, thanks).

Thanks quisling - ditto... must go now.

If you look up the UK version on Wikipedia, under History > Background the reference is at the end. My favourite show growing up

Just got back and read your post, quisling, thanks.
Perhaps I'm still not getting it because I can't quite see the connection. Here's where I am at the moment -

I knew of that link and quite liked the original US show but only one of that particular 'double act' appears to be correctly named - shouldn't both be short versions? And why the oblique ''/'' in the space provided?
And how do both titles together illustrate the puzzle gimmick?

My original search for 'double acts' failed on the bottom right in a similar way because it lacked the necessary shortening (although in full, it matches one of a 60s pop duo). Similarly, the top one is only one half of a US partnership in a completely different field. My thinking is that on one half of the grid someone is missing - on the other side they're both there. The clue gimmick led me to think of an entirely different kind of 'double act' that might account for this (and it is separated by an ''/'').

This won't be the first (or last!} time I've overcomplicated an endgame but I think I'll need a bigger nudge to push me in another direction. Hope my latest 'soliloquy' isn't quite as tortuous as my last one and you can see what I'm getting at (it's quite difficult to discuss these things in the abstract).

Both are 4 word titles with the last 3 words in common (those go in the longer space). The first words can be viewed as thematic variations of each other - either add to the UK show as per the acrosses, or subtract from the US show. I guess those first words go on either side of the "slash."

As for the US guy's name, I suppose it needed to be his full name to fir in the space provided?

Thanks, you haven't entirely allayed my concerns regarding the longer name and the ''/'' but at least I fully understand what you're getting at now.
As things stand, I'm inclined to leave my (rather more complicated) version as it is.

You are quite right. It is a bit unsatisfactory to have the long name in the bottom left. I remember the credits very clearly using the diminutive. He was first named, and when he was no longer with us, his replacement was second named. I might have dealt with it by referring to four names in the uncorrected rows, rather than the remaining entries