This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Kings (American TV series) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
I support merging the Kingdom of Gilboa article into this one. The fact that the show has not even begun is indicative of two things:
MatthewBurton ( talk) 20:30, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Also... The article is obviously copy pasted from a website. [1] If this were to not get merged, it should be nominated for speedy deletion because of the copyright infringement.
L337* P4wn 07:47, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
References
Just so you all know information on the fiction is easily referenceable http://www.unnreports.com/travel/index.shtml here /rankun 149.150.237.59 ( talk) 19:59, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
All the reviews in this article are glowing, yet overall the metacritic tally stands at a fairly mediocre 58. http://www.metacritic.com/tv/shows/kings —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.31.20.76 ( talk) 22:56, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Agree--the salon.com quote seems a bit lengthy; we get the point. I didn't include negative pre-premiere commentary since that seems equally frivolous, but did include the hard audience numbers and some strategic consequences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mediaman2 ( talk • contribs) 22:24, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I didn't say a survey of critical responses would be frivolous, and in fact, the metacritic score would have been quite useful. Instead, there was a salon.com quote from a single reviewer, one that did not seem representative of the greater critical response (which was lukewarm, neither strongly positive or strongly negative). I think these outliers (on the upside or the downside) are frivolous, and some of the middle-of-the-road critiques would have been both more reflective of the critic audience (and, as it turned out, of the audience numbers). Also, Neilsen ratings take DVR into account; and the DVD response won't be known for a year (if ever). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mediaman2 ( talk • contribs) 18:56, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
That said, I think positive + negative reviews together are more useful than just one side. Saw your paragraph with the other side under 'reception', think it was done very well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mediaman2 ( talk • contribs) 19:07, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I see the user Matthew keeps deleting the entry for Kings Wiki without any explanation. Well, he said in the first edit that it's spam, but to me it looks like a good quality, informative and useful link for this article. I'll revert back and wait for explanations, hoping it won't go to 3RR. Cinagua ( talk) 11:28, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
I've removed them. Without citable references making these connections, we cannot include them. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 08:34, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Update: I added sources for about half the characters. I also found two blogs from Christian pastors who identified the other character equivalents (except for Joab, who I think I'll remove for now pending an explanation from whoever added him). However, blogs aren't generally reliable sources — they might be able to squeak by as self-published sources if these particular ministers have been published on a relevant subject (say, the Old Testament, or Hollywood adaptations of Biblical stories). I'm leaving them off for now. — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 05:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
We meet King Silas Benjamin (King Saul of the tribe of Benjamin, first king of Israel), David Shepherd (David, the shepherd), the king’s son Jack (Jonathan), the king's daughter Michelle (Michal), and the Rev. Ephraim Samuels (the Prophet Samuel).
I am not sure this edit works, either. The same problem exists, since it isn't explicitly named in the article. I mean, Li'l Abner and - more on target (since he was a general as well) - Abner Doubleday share the same names. Connecting either one of those fellows because they share a name wouldn't be true to the cited material. Let's just wait for better citation. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 22:04, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I remain unconvinced that the factual statement "Abner shares a name and military position with the Biblical Abner" constitutes original research. That characters in Kings correspond to Biblical figures in the story of Saul and David is cited. That the commander of Saul's army is Abner is citable to the Bible, a relevant primary source. That the commander of Silas' armed forces is General Abner is citable to the primary source of Kings. (See WP:NOTOR#Works of fiction.) If the statement were making a connection to a text, character or historical figure that we didn't have reliable sources connecting the television series to, that would be OR. But all the parts of this statement are verified, albeit not directly.
I was hoping that some third party would express an opinion, here or at WP:NORN#Minor issue at Kings (U.S. TV series). But so far we're left with two editors at loggerheads. Do you think that we might have better luck at Wikipedia:Third opinion? — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 15:26, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Since we haven't had any response at WP:NORN, I've added a request at WP:3. — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 15:51, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
As a third party I honestly feel that the statement "Abner shares a name and military position with the Biblical Abner" is not SYNTH but it almost forces the reader to commit SYNTH so it amounts to the same thing. Is there a citation that can speak to the general trait of naming characters after people in the Bible? That would cover all the bases and should be enough to allow us to draw the inference. Padillah ( talk) 17:14, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Seeing the Plot section is written as a comprehensive summary of the pilot, with the rest of the series as an afterthought, I have rewritten the section and placed it in my user page. I invite other editors to examine the proposed edit, compare it to the current version, and reply to this discussion with their opinion. DerekMBarnes ( talk) 04:07, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Someone undid the addition that contradicted the quote from the creator of the series about the story of David never having been retold, citing it as original research. However, that addition linked to another Wikipedia page which listed various retellings of the story. That addition was not original research and should remain, rather than having the creator's quote (or marketing lie) perpetuate false information. 24.245.42.233 ( talk) 23:41, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
..can we safely assume he is symbolizing Christianity? Can we include it in the article? -- AaThinker ( talk) 20:15, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
I really have to disagree with the editor that removed this info. For one thing, failing to advertise during the single most-watched annual event on your own network is not in the least bit trivial. Second, I don't see how saying so is "skewed" or hurts the article in any way. Khalfani Khaldun 18:42, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- "Unusually, NBC did not advertise Kings during its broadcast of the 2009 Super Bowl"
Of course it's disastrous that 1x09 will be aired July 4th, but aceshowbiz.com says it's true. Can that site be trusted? Maybe we should have air dates back? Zverik ( talk) 12:22, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
It seems like the episode list and the Nielsen Ratings list contain a lot of the same information. This is especially jarring because the two lists are formatted differently, which disrupts the overall cohesion of the page. Is it possible to combine these two lists? -- Imagist ( talk) 21:41, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Citation for statement of cancelation is for Fall lineup and never actually mentions Kings. This lack of mention doesn't guarantee it was cancled nor does it mean it wont be starting a new season in the spring. Until something can be presented stating that Kings has been infact cancled I will remove the cancelation statement.-- 173.71.19.116 ( talk) 20:17, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
This article is clearly developing and does present sufficient citations to be considered start class. As it develops, I would recommend a review of this rating. Your thoughts? IlliniGradResearch ( talk) 21:39, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Since this series seems to be over, I don't think we need to have separate articles for the characters. One was created, but there is pretty much nothing in it. DJ Clayworth ( talk) 14:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
The DVD should have been released by now. Anybody want to post the details? Ronstew (cannot type tildes for some reason)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Kings (U.S. TV series). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 23:57, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 20 external links on Kings (U.S. TV series). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:06, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Kings (American TV series) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
I support merging the Kingdom of Gilboa article into this one. The fact that the show has not even begun is indicative of two things:
MatthewBurton ( talk) 20:30, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Also... The article is obviously copy pasted from a website. [1] If this were to not get merged, it should be nominated for speedy deletion because of the copyright infringement.
L337* P4wn 07:47, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
References
Just so you all know information on the fiction is easily referenceable http://www.unnreports.com/travel/index.shtml here /rankun 149.150.237.59 ( talk) 19:59, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
All the reviews in this article are glowing, yet overall the metacritic tally stands at a fairly mediocre 58. http://www.metacritic.com/tv/shows/kings —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.31.20.76 ( talk) 22:56, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Agree--the salon.com quote seems a bit lengthy; we get the point. I didn't include negative pre-premiere commentary since that seems equally frivolous, but did include the hard audience numbers and some strategic consequences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mediaman2 ( talk • contribs) 22:24, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I didn't say a survey of critical responses would be frivolous, and in fact, the metacritic score would have been quite useful. Instead, there was a salon.com quote from a single reviewer, one that did not seem representative of the greater critical response (which was lukewarm, neither strongly positive or strongly negative). I think these outliers (on the upside or the downside) are frivolous, and some of the middle-of-the-road critiques would have been both more reflective of the critic audience (and, as it turned out, of the audience numbers). Also, Neilsen ratings take DVR into account; and the DVD response won't be known for a year (if ever). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mediaman2 ( talk • contribs) 18:56, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
That said, I think positive + negative reviews together are more useful than just one side. Saw your paragraph with the other side under 'reception', think it was done very well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mediaman2 ( talk • contribs) 19:07, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I see the user Matthew keeps deleting the entry for Kings Wiki without any explanation. Well, he said in the first edit that it's spam, but to me it looks like a good quality, informative and useful link for this article. I'll revert back and wait for explanations, hoping it won't go to 3RR. Cinagua ( talk) 11:28, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
I've removed them. Without citable references making these connections, we cannot include them. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 08:34, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Update: I added sources for about half the characters. I also found two blogs from Christian pastors who identified the other character equivalents (except for Joab, who I think I'll remove for now pending an explanation from whoever added him). However, blogs aren't generally reliable sources — they might be able to squeak by as self-published sources if these particular ministers have been published on a relevant subject (say, the Old Testament, or Hollywood adaptations of Biblical stories). I'm leaving them off for now. — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 05:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
We meet King Silas Benjamin (King Saul of the tribe of Benjamin, first king of Israel), David Shepherd (David, the shepherd), the king’s son Jack (Jonathan), the king's daughter Michelle (Michal), and the Rev. Ephraim Samuels (the Prophet Samuel).
I am not sure this edit works, either. The same problem exists, since it isn't explicitly named in the article. I mean, Li'l Abner and - more on target (since he was a general as well) - Abner Doubleday share the same names. Connecting either one of those fellows because they share a name wouldn't be true to the cited material. Let's just wait for better citation. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 22:04, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I remain unconvinced that the factual statement "Abner shares a name and military position with the Biblical Abner" constitutes original research. That characters in Kings correspond to Biblical figures in the story of Saul and David is cited. That the commander of Saul's army is Abner is citable to the Bible, a relevant primary source. That the commander of Silas' armed forces is General Abner is citable to the primary source of Kings. (See WP:NOTOR#Works of fiction.) If the statement were making a connection to a text, character or historical figure that we didn't have reliable sources connecting the television series to, that would be OR. But all the parts of this statement are verified, albeit not directly.
I was hoping that some third party would express an opinion, here or at WP:NORN#Minor issue at Kings (U.S. TV series). But so far we're left with two editors at loggerheads. Do you think that we might have better luck at Wikipedia:Third opinion? — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 15:26, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Since we haven't had any response at WP:NORN, I've added a request at WP:3. — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 15:51, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
As a third party I honestly feel that the statement "Abner shares a name and military position with the Biblical Abner" is not SYNTH but it almost forces the reader to commit SYNTH so it amounts to the same thing. Is there a citation that can speak to the general trait of naming characters after people in the Bible? That would cover all the bases and should be enough to allow us to draw the inference. Padillah ( talk) 17:14, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Seeing the Plot section is written as a comprehensive summary of the pilot, with the rest of the series as an afterthought, I have rewritten the section and placed it in my user page. I invite other editors to examine the proposed edit, compare it to the current version, and reply to this discussion with their opinion. DerekMBarnes ( talk) 04:07, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Someone undid the addition that contradicted the quote from the creator of the series about the story of David never having been retold, citing it as original research. However, that addition linked to another Wikipedia page which listed various retellings of the story. That addition was not original research and should remain, rather than having the creator's quote (or marketing lie) perpetuate false information. 24.245.42.233 ( talk) 23:41, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
..can we safely assume he is symbolizing Christianity? Can we include it in the article? -- AaThinker ( talk) 20:15, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
I really have to disagree with the editor that removed this info. For one thing, failing to advertise during the single most-watched annual event on your own network is not in the least bit trivial. Second, I don't see how saying so is "skewed" or hurts the article in any way. Khalfani Khaldun 18:42, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- "Unusually, NBC did not advertise Kings during its broadcast of the 2009 Super Bowl"
Of course it's disastrous that 1x09 will be aired July 4th, but aceshowbiz.com says it's true. Can that site be trusted? Maybe we should have air dates back? Zverik ( talk) 12:22, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
It seems like the episode list and the Nielsen Ratings list contain a lot of the same information. This is especially jarring because the two lists are formatted differently, which disrupts the overall cohesion of the page. Is it possible to combine these two lists? -- Imagist ( talk) 21:41, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Citation for statement of cancelation is for Fall lineup and never actually mentions Kings. This lack of mention doesn't guarantee it was cancled nor does it mean it wont be starting a new season in the spring. Until something can be presented stating that Kings has been infact cancled I will remove the cancelation statement.-- 173.71.19.116 ( talk) 20:17, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
This article is clearly developing and does present sufficient citations to be considered start class. As it develops, I would recommend a review of this rating. Your thoughts? IlliniGradResearch ( talk) 21:39, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Since this series seems to be over, I don't think we need to have separate articles for the characters. One was created, but there is pretty much nothing in it. DJ Clayworth ( talk) 14:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
The DVD should have been released by now. Anybody want to post the details? Ronstew (cannot type tildes for some reason)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Kings (U.S. TV series). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 23:57, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 20 external links on Kings (U.S. TV series). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:06, 6 May 2017 (UTC)