![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Can we get a page for the new DVD, since we have one for the soundtrack and video game??? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PeachGal ( talk • contribs) 03:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC).
Plase!
Surely "and Oliver acts like shakespeare."?
DA!
Why are all of the Hannah Montana articles HORRIBLE! Bibliomaniac15 03:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Probably because they're written by the target audience of the show. Shall I add a clean-up notice?
This episode (People who uses people) needs serious editing and revising. I can't follow the plotline
Who took off all the screenshots???????!!!!!!! Jordan_pruitt22 9:17, 6 May 2007
Resently, users have been adding links to Myspace for the actor's on this show. Miley Cyrus, Mitchel Musso, & Emily Osment have all stated that they do -- 71.30.74.167 19:05, 7 May 2007 (UTC) == not == have Myspace accounts. The people who have those accounts are frauds.
Do not delete the table! It helps keep t orderly. If you feel obligated to make an edit on the table, please press the "Show Preview" button before you save, or request the change on the talk page. bibliomaniac15 20:51, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Although Wikipedia is not a Democracy, I suggest that we take a vote. bibliomaniac15 21:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Tally: (2/0/0)
I vote for both the table and the detailed summaries. Sometimes people like to have a long explainations of the episode and the detailed sumarries will keep them from trying to put it in the table. Also, others would rather not have the whole episode spoiled, so the table is the best for them.-- SoapTalker 05:32, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree that we should keep the current(10/17/2006) table.
Brandonrc 23:22, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Why do we have summaries for episodes that haven't aired yet? Some of them are really complete and sound true. - Peregrinefisher 23:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I do not know where we want to get the information for upcoming episodes. I noticed one on the official Disney site and added that. After that I noticed that about 8 more episodes were listed in the WIKI the same day. If I remember correctly there was a list of upcoming episodes that had been removed. Just thought that I would bring this up and see what everyone thought. Brandonrc 05:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
I created the new table in an attempt to clean it up and clean up the list of episodes. I am creating pages for the existing episodes as I go, and then deleting the extended synopsis on this page for that episode. I used the information on listed on The Disney Channel official site to confirm upcoming episodes for the table; any other information I left in the synopsis area, as I don't know where it came from, other than imdb.com or tv.com, as that isn't necessarily reliable. If you have references for those episode titles or synopses, I have no problem with them being in the table. I just would rather not have the entire table reverted unless you have a good reason, as I think it was an upward change, so please make any edits to the new table if possible. Thanks. :-) - Shannernanner 04:14, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I created individual episode pages for all the aired episodes and the upcoming episodes which are listed on the Disney Channel official site, except the last one ( Good Golly, Miss Dolly)--all the available information is on the wikitable; the remaining episode titles and synopses I moved here. If anyone can provide reliable sources for any or all of them, please do:
I don't feel comfortable uploading images myself so could somebody please upload and post this image for Good Golly, Miss Dolly? http://www.fansitefreaks.com/miley/gallery2/displayimage.php?album=46&pos=33 (Here's the site.) Mzperfection42 20:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
On the Hannah Montana official TV listings site, it says that the next Hannah Montana episode to air after Good Golly, Miss Dolly, is going to be Torn Between Two Hannahs. It's airing on October 14. Could somebody add that to the table? Mzperfection42 20:55, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Would it be OK to include a link to YouTube on each episode's page (if applicable)? There are YT users who post full episodes. Pink moon 1287 21:44, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
TVGuide has a totally different synopsis for People Who Use People episode. Since Disney Channel hasn't posted the episode synopsis, I believe that we should use the synopsis they give because they are also very reliable. Could somebody please make that swap? Here's the link: http://tvguide.com/detail/tv-show.aspx?episodeid=6003178&tvobjectid=278865&more=ucepisodelist The synopsis is near the top of the page. Mzperfection42 02:20, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
After watching the episode " Money For Nothing, Guilt for Free" I was trying to figure out where (chronologically) it fits in to the episode list. Jake Ryan does not appear in the episode which leads me to believe that it belongs before " New Kid in School." It could also be argued that it can be placed after Jake leaves for Romania (if/when he actually does). What I am getting at is that its current location fine (at the end of season 1) for now, but in the future it should be relocated. I immediately see three options for its placement:
I like the idea of placing it in its to-be-decided chronological location. My second choice would be the separate section for miscellaneous episodes. Obviously there is no rush to decide this, but it is never too soon to see what people think about where it should end up. What are your thoughts?
Brandonrc 05:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
I am curious where the air dates for the United Kingdom are coming from. I visited the Disney Channel UK site and was not able to find much information about Hannah Montana. Is there any reference that can be made to this information? I would assume that if the episode had aired already in the UK that there would be more information available about them. As of this comment there are 6 episodes that have "aired" yet there is no information about them. I propose that the air dates be removed unless they can be verified. Any other thoughts?
Brandonrc 02:46, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Maybe from people who live in the UK! Mouseinthehouse 14:10, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Where did all those season 2 titles come from? Very high risk of vandalism/overactive imagination about this kind of stuff. If there isn't a source, we need to remove them. Everyking 10:38, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
On Access Hollywood, they did a segment with Brooke Shields. She will be guest starring on a new episode of Hannah Montana this summer. She'll cause havoc on Miley/Hannah and her dad. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LAUGH90 ( talk • contribs) 22:44, 4 February 2007 (UTC).
First of all, Brooke Shields is a woman, not a man, and also she is going to play Miley's mother in a flashback, not cause havoc to them. Tsears
All the episode descriptions from season two have been changed to "Summary Needed." I am curious why the summaries were removed? The source for the summaries, titles, and the episode screen shots is the same. If the summaries are deemed to be incorrect, should the current season two episode titles also be removed? I am wondering if there is any good reasoning they were removed, otherwise I would be more than happy to add them again.
Brandonrc 05:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
You Are SO WRONG!
Please refer to
Template_talk:Episode_list#Image_field_removed for discussion. I am merely a messenger. I will monitor the template and if the images are allowed again I will help add them back to this page.
Brandonrc 04:57, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Can anyone find a link to an online site that says that this new episode will be showing in the uk? Mouseinthehouse 08:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
On all the Hannah Montana episode pages, why is their a concern from an editor? All the episodes establish full notability, they have no false information, and they are written in encyclopedia form. Can someone explain this to me? -- 69.236.183.47 02:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
The spoiler for the Hannah Montana season finale at the end of the page in the External links section should be removed. No one wants to know what happens and it ruins it for everybody who wants to watch it. Plus, it might not be true. 24.15.8.145 20:36, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Your right if it isn't true then it shouldn't be in there, but you should let other people make the decide whether or not they want to know what happens put it on there (if you can be sure it is true, and you don't have to do it but someone should). If someone wants to read it then they at least can. Or if you cant be sure put in a link. Smileyface 12 91
Which season finale? The first season, or second? If it's the first, then we shouldn't need this discussion... 68.210.143.110 14:58, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't get why my citation needed tag keeps on getting removed. It is not on Google at all except for Wikipedia and a few blogs asking if it was real. Currently, there is no proof of such an episode, so stop deleting my citation needed tag. -- 69.236.162.71 19:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Someone has deleted Achy Jakey Heart Part 1, but I don't quite know how to put it right. Also, I think that Achy Jakey Heart (both eps) should be spelt ACHY (with no e) as that is how the song is spelt. Mouseinthehouse 09:19, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Following the review of notability according to WP:EPISODE, the individual episodes have been redirected to the 'list of episodes' page, as per decision reached here. The information is NOT lost, and can be retrieved from the edit history of each page, but please only recreate pages if you can establish their notability. See WP:TV-REVIEW. Gwinva 20:42, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Not that it was a bad thing but who put all the episodes back? I think that some of them need to be rewriten. Smileyface 12 91 ^_~
The airdate for when you wish you were the star says 13 July as the original airdate. However, the original airdate should surely be the worldwide airdate. The episode is premiering on 7 July in the UK, as shown by this source here. I think that the airdate of 7 July should be down as it is the original airdate. If not, the title of the column should be US airdate to make it clear. Mouseinthehouse 16:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I think that is a good idea and I can find out the info soon. I can't do the table and so I will post the info here so that some one else can put it up. Is that ok? Mouseinthehouse 06:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Who deleted the pages for ALL of the episodes? Why did you do that? Special: Contributions/24.186.246.59 at 7:18 PM on July 4, 2007
Because the process by which a decision was reached to redirect these articles was not credible and does not represent consensus, I propose that all of these articles be restored. If we wish to see what people's opinions are, this page is the place to get them, not a page that is only frequented by deletionists who are opposed to episode content in general. Everyking 07:51, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
The vandals sure have been busy today. WAVY 10 20:53, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
The following is an episode review discussion that is intended to evaluate articles for individual episodes. See WP:TV-REVIEW and WP:EPISODE for more info.
Per WP:EPISODE, not every episode of a TV show should likely have an individual article. This can be for many reasons, such as notability or sources, or even just what format fits best for that show.
The review process for episode articles is evolving. This set of episode articles has already been reviewed once on a separate page (see below). Due to some concerns about people not knowing about the review, as well as simply experimenting with reviewing the same set twice, we're opening a second discussion.
The following articles lack real world information, besides basic infobox stuff:
The following have Neilsan ratings:
While the ratings is a start, as noted on the first review, one can easily place this same info in a list of episodes.
As with the first review, I still support redirecting all the articles to the list of episodes, and possibly expanding the episode table to include the TV ratings. -- Ned Scott 05:15, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
![]() | To Wikipedians new to this discussion, please read the first review. The consensus will be developed weighing both reviews, so you may wish to address things the first review brought up |
CONSENSUS: REDIRECT ALL Gwinva 20:46, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
But you could provide a footnote that mentions the crossover (plus, is it a real cross over, or are some of the characters just being used...i.e. was it intended as a crossover for the two series?...that requires a citation). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 20:05, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Episodes without real world information
Episodes with rating sources
It seems to me, that if the only thing to be found is a Nielsen rating, we could adapt the "List of" table to have a section for Neilsen ratings. I don't see a reason to keep any episode just because we know how many viewers there were. It's simplistic information that doesn't require critical commentary itself. It's as easy as "This is the rating." And it wouldn't be that hard to add another column on the List of tables. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 21:57, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
In the first place, I think everyone agrees that Hannah Montana is quite notable. My opinion is that plot summaries are a necessary element to covering the topic, and that the tiny summaries now on the episode list are not at all adequate for this purpose. I don't feel there is any way to cover the topic properly without having the individual articles. If the plot summaries on the list were expanded, I think there would be spoiler concerns; it's useful to have a very brief summary on the list, with a more comprehensive summary available on the episode articles, to serve people who are looking for different levels of detail. Furthermore, the page would eventually become too long, and there would be no reasonable opportunity to expand the content beyond plot as presented on the list.
Some people oppose having separate episode articles, but are in favor of having articles on the main topic, reasoning that articles should only exist if they present the right amount of internal context. My view is that having separate articles on smaller parts of the topic is simply an extension of the content in the main article and operates on summary style logic. I feel it is an error to focus rigidly on the context presented in individual articles when they clearly represent coherently organized sections of a broader whole. Ideally, episode articles would all be rich in background information in addition to plot, but it is also irrational, "all or nothing" thinking to say that the content should not exist at all (except in an extremely truncated form as part of a list) if that other detail is not present.
Hannah Montana is a notable show, which can be clearly demonstrated through sources, and its episodes are notable elements of the topic, with their plots being verifiable through the episodes themselves. The content on these episodes cannot rationally be expected to grow if their articles are not accessible to ordinary editors, and it is moreover a needless disservice to readers to not provide information that is clearly sought after, and which has already been written and could be presented to them at any time. Everyking 06:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
I have not read every one of these articles (Please, no!) but I looked at a bunch. As I view it they do fail to establish notability. The plot summaries are more ‘well’ developed — which to me is a good reason to trim them down; don't tell the whole thing.
Several points in the above discussion deserve comment. The concept of ‘inherited notability’ is one that needs to be dispensed with. In most cases a tv show itself will indeed be notable, but individual episodes will not be. There may be cases where an individual episode can be established as notable for any number of reasons, which is fine. This would involve reliable sources that are specific to the episode. The other point I'd like to comment on is the endless links to imdb.com and tv.com — the presence of these links is fine, but they do not amount to reliable sources; most of the ones I've looked at for specific episodes are lame in the extreme. -- Jack Merridew 09:44, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
I have rewritten this Friends episode to demonstrate that kind of out-of-universe notability (won an episode-specific award, most watched episode of the series, produced a spin-off show) - probably any of those on their own would be grounds for arguing notability. Other clear examples: Trapped in the Closet (South Park), garnered significant media attention and was the subject of a debate about censorship, etc..., Deep Space Homer produced a culturally significant meme and has been the subject of external references, similarly Happy Days Episode 89 (Fonzie jumps the Shark! - no article) and Point of View (the M*A*S*H episode, no article) for its contribution to and role in television production techniques, etc..., etc.... In my reading of the Episode guideline, the mindless pablum of a DVD commentary track in no way qualifies as out-of-universe unless it can be demonstrably shown that the material itself has notability beyond the narrow confines of the show. I note that two of those episodes I cited do not yet have articles, while we nonetheless have all the highly unnotable articles above.... That simply confirms my view that this is fan-driven content (fine in-and-of-itself) that cares nothing for the guidelines and principles that have been established by consensus across the community (unacceptable). Eusebeus 14:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Do we have any kind of consensus developing here? Is there at least a general agreement that the episodes for which we have found sources should remain? Everyking 05:53, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Sounds like the same ol' discussion, but I think the pages should stay. Recent episodes are easy to add referenced info to, but people don't bother unless they're put on the chopping block. - Peregrine Fisher 19:32, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Close how? The discussion above seems to me to be pretty evenly split, a classic example of "no consensus". I know that I'm coming in late, but I'd like to remind participants of something Jimbo said a long time ago. Some of you have seen me quote this before, but some of you probably haven't. It's from the earliest incarnation of Wikipedia:Importance:
As Everyking notes above, this is essentially an inclusionist/deletionist debate. My own leanings are generally inclusionist, but I do accept the general principle that not every television episode necessarily deserves its own Wikipedia page. On the subject of Hannah Montana episodes, I am agnostic, since I know next to nothing about the series. (Unlike some editors, however, I wouldn't dare to suggest that my own ignorance is evidence that the series or its episodes are not notable.)
A question I would ask is whether a printed Hannah Montana episode guide exists. If it does, and includes more than cast lists and plot summaries for each episode, I would consider that evidence that Hannah Montana episodes have the potential to meet the requirements of WP:RS and WP:N. If not, I would consider that evidence that most individual Hannah Montana episodes (with the exception of the ones noted above) do not have the potential to meet the requirements of WP:RS or WP:N. Would that be a reasonable conclusion to draw? — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 06:27, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't know about anyone else, but I have not been able to find a printed episode guide. If there's nothing else to be said for this matter, we'll be adding a ratings column to the list of eps article, and redirecting once again. -- Ned Scott 05:12, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
As much as I want to keep them, let's just get some closure and sort the mess out later. WAVY 10 14:59, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
We have another issue; not all of the episodes were included in the discussion list and I've not done anything to those (or the block under Neilsan ratings). These are mostly at the end of the LOE and may have been created since the original list was generated or may have been redirected at that moment... I believe that they should be included in this review. -- Jack Merridew 14:05, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Additional columns can be added to the episode list template by using Aux1=, Aux2=, or Aux3=. -- Ned Scott 19:07, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
What got me thinking about the notability issue is the challenge being made to the Buffy episodes on similar grounds. That particular show is being held up as an example to emulate for series TV even to the point of featured article status. I wonder what the point is overall. We have articles on each of the characters. A TV series is notable solely because it is being broadcast. What is missing from an encyclopedic perspective is complete verifiable information about what is already passed the notability test, which the series has; the episodes add to that. We don't have in the summary the work product information of the people in the credits, the guest cast, the writer, director. We should have that. We don't need a Readers Digest version of the episode, a trivia section, or a goofs sections but we should have a place for important data from the primary source - the episode itself, about the people who created the show. -- NrDg 20:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
I've started adding Writer, Director and Guest stars to the season 1 table. Let me know if there are any objections before I do much more work on this. -- NrDg 00:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
I heard that Dolly Parton and Vicki Lawrence are guest starring in the same episode together here. Is there anywhere to put the info? Mouseinthehouse 17:56, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Why is there not a page for this episode if all the pages have been restored? Mouseinthehouse 17:56, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
In the article it mentions that the name Everybody Was Best-Friend Fighting comes from the song Kung Fu Fighting twice. It says it in the first paragraph and again in the trivia section. Smileyface 12 91 22:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
The episodes on the separate page for I Want You to Want Me...To Go to Florida has Everybody Was Best-Friend Fighting as the next show, followed by Me and Mr. Jonas. Where did Song Sung Bad (the one with...for now, as an earlier version listed Lily as trying to start a singing career of her own...Lily being supposed to record something for her mom) come in (assuming this has even been confirmed)? WAVY 10 15:58, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
who ever keeps on redirecting the episode articles to the list of episode page, STOP DOING THAT!!!! AND WHO EVER DID THIS, PUT THOSE PAGES BACK UP, NOOOOOOOOOOWW!!!!! 24.186.246.59 at 7:47 PM on July 24, 2007.
To all who keep trying to revive the episode links...PLEASE STOP IT! Consensus was to merge (I was one fighting to save a few of them), and unless enough information for it to pass WP:N, don't play "Lazarus" with these articles. WAVY 10 01:07, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
We really need to edit the Hannah Montana episodes. We also need the screen shots.
It's clear from the above discussion that no consensus was reached, yet somebody redirected the articles anyway and even closed off the discussion, as if to say no further discussion shall be permitted. Who was responsible for that? I propose that all the articles be restored and that the discussion be reopened. In particular, discussion needs to continue regarding the episodes for which secondary sources were found, because I believe consensus can be reached (and may already exist) to keep those. Everyking 04:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
(outdent) Well, thats the way things currently work. I suppose the closing could be undone and a {{ wider attention}} tag could be placed. i (said) (did) 05:20, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
I should point out, this was not a discussion to see who wanted to keep the articles or not. This was a discussion to see if they were notable or not. No one was able to assert any reasonable level of notability. -- Ned Scott 05:33, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
A few people said the pages should be redirected, a few said they shouldn't be redirected, a few references were added, and then the pages were redirected. It's the classic deletionist vs. inclusionist argument. Refs have no effect on the argument. We need some new rules. Something like, every time a reference is added, no redirecteing is allowed. - Peregrine Fisher 08:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
KEEP I came into this debate late and am new at editing so I tend to go with what others say. I brought up a concern about losing information that I think belong in a complete article about a TV series and was effectively overridden. So I compromised in a way I really didn't want to. I took the statement that this issue was closed as a given and did not feel comfortable enough with my gut reason to debate the issues against Wikipedia lawyers. Given that I was misled. I will state strongly that I want the article pages back. Add me to the list who want to keep them.
I think that notability must be based on the FACT that something is notable to a large interested group. We can't use original research in the articles but I see no reason not to use original research to establish notability. I don't care what Wiki policy says - these articles ARE notable in an absolute sense, even if some good secondary source has not blessed it. The fact that there is significant discussion on the web about them DOES establish that they are notable.
From an other perspective these articles are an organization method of presenting a complete article about something that is established as notable, an Emmy nominated TV Series. This is NOT inherited notability, multiple pages are needed to the cover the subject in the way that is needed. We shouldn't have to establish notability every time we chose to change organizational structure. -- NrDg 13:06, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
As Ned commented above, no one established any notability for the episode articles. The discussion had gone quiet after several comments were made to the effect that they would then be redirected. I redirected them and added the viewers column to the LOE as per others comments. Hey, they're all still there; this isn't about 'delete'. I will refrain from further edits on this score and see where this goes. They have not established their notability. -- Jack Merridew 13:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
I see that Achy Jakey Heart has appeared. It will be interesting to see how this evolves. -- Jack Merridew 15:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
I just noticed that there are two episodes listed with production code '123' and not knowing where these numbers came from have no way of being sure how to fix this. -- Jack Merridew 09:57, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I removed co-star credited actors from the guest star list. I created the guest star list from watching the episode credits and the actors listed are in the credited order. If someone wishes to create a co-star list, that is fine. I was planning on doing that too when I had time but if you do so please list them in credited order as the order is meaningfully. -- NrDg 12:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
This is just me but I'm not sure whether this is a real episode or not. It seems highly unlikely that they would have an episode based around terrorism. I may be wrong but this is my opinion. Race t 16:23, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone know why some of the "Songs Featured:" won't appear? I could swear that I saw some in "edit this page" that didn't appear. ZSoraz 23:13, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Can we get a page for the new DVD, since we have one for the soundtrack and video game??? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PeachGal ( talk • contribs) 03:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC).
Plase!
Surely "and Oliver acts like shakespeare."?
DA!
Why are all of the Hannah Montana articles HORRIBLE! Bibliomaniac15 03:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Probably because they're written by the target audience of the show. Shall I add a clean-up notice?
This episode (People who uses people) needs serious editing and revising. I can't follow the plotline
Who took off all the screenshots???????!!!!!!! Jordan_pruitt22 9:17, 6 May 2007
Resently, users have been adding links to Myspace for the actor's on this show. Miley Cyrus, Mitchel Musso, & Emily Osment have all stated that they do -- 71.30.74.167 19:05, 7 May 2007 (UTC) == not == have Myspace accounts. The people who have those accounts are frauds.
Do not delete the table! It helps keep t orderly. If you feel obligated to make an edit on the table, please press the "Show Preview" button before you save, or request the change on the talk page. bibliomaniac15 20:51, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Although Wikipedia is not a Democracy, I suggest that we take a vote. bibliomaniac15 21:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Tally: (2/0/0)
I vote for both the table and the detailed summaries. Sometimes people like to have a long explainations of the episode and the detailed sumarries will keep them from trying to put it in the table. Also, others would rather not have the whole episode spoiled, so the table is the best for them.-- SoapTalker 05:32, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree that we should keep the current(10/17/2006) table.
Brandonrc 23:22, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Why do we have summaries for episodes that haven't aired yet? Some of them are really complete and sound true. - Peregrinefisher 23:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I do not know where we want to get the information for upcoming episodes. I noticed one on the official Disney site and added that. After that I noticed that about 8 more episodes were listed in the WIKI the same day. If I remember correctly there was a list of upcoming episodes that had been removed. Just thought that I would bring this up and see what everyone thought. Brandonrc 05:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
I created the new table in an attempt to clean it up and clean up the list of episodes. I am creating pages for the existing episodes as I go, and then deleting the extended synopsis on this page for that episode. I used the information on listed on The Disney Channel official site to confirm upcoming episodes for the table; any other information I left in the synopsis area, as I don't know where it came from, other than imdb.com or tv.com, as that isn't necessarily reliable. If you have references for those episode titles or synopses, I have no problem with them being in the table. I just would rather not have the entire table reverted unless you have a good reason, as I think it was an upward change, so please make any edits to the new table if possible. Thanks. :-) - Shannernanner 04:14, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I created individual episode pages for all the aired episodes and the upcoming episodes which are listed on the Disney Channel official site, except the last one ( Good Golly, Miss Dolly)--all the available information is on the wikitable; the remaining episode titles and synopses I moved here. If anyone can provide reliable sources for any or all of them, please do:
I don't feel comfortable uploading images myself so could somebody please upload and post this image for Good Golly, Miss Dolly? http://www.fansitefreaks.com/miley/gallery2/displayimage.php?album=46&pos=33 (Here's the site.) Mzperfection42 20:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
On the Hannah Montana official TV listings site, it says that the next Hannah Montana episode to air after Good Golly, Miss Dolly, is going to be Torn Between Two Hannahs. It's airing on October 14. Could somebody add that to the table? Mzperfection42 20:55, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Would it be OK to include a link to YouTube on each episode's page (if applicable)? There are YT users who post full episodes. Pink moon 1287 21:44, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
TVGuide has a totally different synopsis for People Who Use People episode. Since Disney Channel hasn't posted the episode synopsis, I believe that we should use the synopsis they give because they are also very reliable. Could somebody please make that swap? Here's the link: http://tvguide.com/detail/tv-show.aspx?episodeid=6003178&tvobjectid=278865&more=ucepisodelist The synopsis is near the top of the page. Mzperfection42 02:20, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
After watching the episode " Money For Nothing, Guilt for Free" I was trying to figure out where (chronologically) it fits in to the episode list. Jake Ryan does not appear in the episode which leads me to believe that it belongs before " New Kid in School." It could also be argued that it can be placed after Jake leaves for Romania (if/when he actually does). What I am getting at is that its current location fine (at the end of season 1) for now, but in the future it should be relocated. I immediately see three options for its placement:
I like the idea of placing it in its to-be-decided chronological location. My second choice would be the separate section for miscellaneous episodes. Obviously there is no rush to decide this, but it is never too soon to see what people think about where it should end up. What are your thoughts?
Brandonrc 05:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
I am curious where the air dates for the United Kingdom are coming from. I visited the Disney Channel UK site and was not able to find much information about Hannah Montana. Is there any reference that can be made to this information? I would assume that if the episode had aired already in the UK that there would be more information available about them. As of this comment there are 6 episodes that have "aired" yet there is no information about them. I propose that the air dates be removed unless they can be verified. Any other thoughts?
Brandonrc 02:46, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Maybe from people who live in the UK! Mouseinthehouse 14:10, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Where did all those season 2 titles come from? Very high risk of vandalism/overactive imagination about this kind of stuff. If there isn't a source, we need to remove them. Everyking 10:38, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
On Access Hollywood, they did a segment with Brooke Shields. She will be guest starring on a new episode of Hannah Montana this summer. She'll cause havoc on Miley/Hannah and her dad. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LAUGH90 ( talk • contribs) 22:44, 4 February 2007 (UTC).
First of all, Brooke Shields is a woman, not a man, and also she is going to play Miley's mother in a flashback, not cause havoc to them. Tsears
All the episode descriptions from season two have been changed to "Summary Needed." I am curious why the summaries were removed? The source for the summaries, titles, and the episode screen shots is the same. If the summaries are deemed to be incorrect, should the current season two episode titles also be removed? I am wondering if there is any good reasoning they were removed, otherwise I would be more than happy to add them again.
Brandonrc 05:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
You Are SO WRONG!
Please refer to
Template_talk:Episode_list#Image_field_removed for discussion. I am merely a messenger. I will monitor the template and if the images are allowed again I will help add them back to this page.
Brandonrc 04:57, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Can anyone find a link to an online site that says that this new episode will be showing in the uk? Mouseinthehouse 08:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
On all the Hannah Montana episode pages, why is their a concern from an editor? All the episodes establish full notability, they have no false information, and they are written in encyclopedia form. Can someone explain this to me? -- 69.236.183.47 02:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
The spoiler for the Hannah Montana season finale at the end of the page in the External links section should be removed. No one wants to know what happens and it ruins it for everybody who wants to watch it. Plus, it might not be true. 24.15.8.145 20:36, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Your right if it isn't true then it shouldn't be in there, but you should let other people make the decide whether or not they want to know what happens put it on there (if you can be sure it is true, and you don't have to do it but someone should). If someone wants to read it then they at least can. Or if you cant be sure put in a link. Smileyface 12 91
Which season finale? The first season, or second? If it's the first, then we shouldn't need this discussion... 68.210.143.110 14:58, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't get why my citation needed tag keeps on getting removed. It is not on Google at all except for Wikipedia and a few blogs asking if it was real. Currently, there is no proof of such an episode, so stop deleting my citation needed tag. -- 69.236.162.71 19:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Someone has deleted Achy Jakey Heart Part 1, but I don't quite know how to put it right. Also, I think that Achy Jakey Heart (both eps) should be spelt ACHY (with no e) as that is how the song is spelt. Mouseinthehouse 09:19, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Following the review of notability according to WP:EPISODE, the individual episodes have been redirected to the 'list of episodes' page, as per decision reached here. The information is NOT lost, and can be retrieved from the edit history of each page, but please only recreate pages if you can establish their notability. See WP:TV-REVIEW. Gwinva 20:42, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Not that it was a bad thing but who put all the episodes back? I think that some of them need to be rewriten. Smileyface 12 91 ^_~
The airdate for when you wish you were the star says 13 July as the original airdate. However, the original airdate should surely be the worldwide airdate. The episode is premiering on 7 July in the UK, as shown by this source here. I think that the airdate of 7 July should be down as it is the original airdate. If not, the title of the column should be US airdate to make it clear. Mouseinthehouse 16:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I think that is a good idea and I can find out the info soon. I can't do the table and so I will post the info here so that some one else can put it up. Is that ok? Mouseinthehouse 06:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Who deleted the pages for ALL of the episodes? Why did you do that? Special: Contributions/24.186.246.59 at 7:18 PM on July 4, 2007
Because the process by which a decision was reached to redirect these articles was not credible and does not represent consensus, I propose that all of these articles be restored. If we wish to see what people's opinions are, this page is the place to get them, not a page that is only frequented by deletionists who are opposed to episode content in general. Everyking 07:51, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
The vandals sure have been busy today. WAVY 10 20:53, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
The following is an episode review discussion that is intended to evaluate articles for individual episodes. See WP:TV-REVIEW and WP:EPISODE for more info.
Per WP:EPISODE, not every episode of a TV show should likely have an individual article. This can be for many reasons, such as notability or sources, or even just what format fits best for that show.
The review process for episode articles is evolving. This set of episode articles has already been reviewed once on a separate page (see below). Due to some concerns about people not knowing about the review, as well as simply experimenting with reviewing the same set twice, we're opening a second discussion.
The following articles lack real world information, besides basic infobox stuff:
The following have Neilsan ratings:
While the ratings is a start, as noted on the first review, one can easily place this same info in a list of episodes.
As with the first review, I still support redirecting all the articles to the list of episodes, and possibly expanding the episode table to include the TV ratings. -- Ned Scott 05:15, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
![]() | To Wikipedians new to this discussion, please read the first review. The consensus will be developed weighing both reviews, so you may wish to address things the first review brought up |
CONSENSUS: REDIRECT ALL Gwinva 20:46, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
But you could provide a footnote that mentions the crossover (plus, is it a real cross over, or are some of the characters just being used...i.e. was it intended as a crossover for the two series?...that requires a citation). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 20:05, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Episodes without real world information
Episodes with rating sources
It seems to me, that if the only thing to be found is a Nielsen rating, we could adapt the "List of" table to have a section for Neilsen ratings. I don't see a reason to keep any episode just because we know how many viewers there were. It's simplistic information that doesn't require critical commentary itself. It's as easy as "This is the rating." And it wouldn't be that hard to add another column on the List of tables. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 21:57, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
In the first place, I think everyone agrees that Hannah Montana is quite notable. My opinion is that plot summaries are a necessary element to covering the topic, and that the tiny summaries now on the episode list are not at all adequate for this purpose. I don't feel there is any way to cover the topic properly without having the individual articles. If the plot summaries on the list were expanded, I think there would be spoiler concerns; it's useful to have a very brief summary on the list, with a more comprehensive summary available on the episode articles, to serve people who are looking for different levels of detail. Furthermore, the page would eventually become too long, and there would be no reasonable opportunity to expand the content beyond plot as presented on the list.
Some people oppose having separate episode articles, but are in favor of having articles on the main topic, reasoning that articles should only exist if they present the right amount of internal context. My view is that having separate articles on smaller parts of the topic is simply an extension of the content in the main article and operates on summary style logic. I feel it is an error to focus rigidly on the context presented in individual articles when they clearly represent coherently organized sections of a broader whole. Ideally, episode articles would all be rich in background information in addition to plot, but it is also irrational, "all or nothing" thinking to say that the content should not exist at all (except in an extremely truncated form as part of a list) if that other detail is not present.
Hannah Montana is a notable show, which can be clearly demonstrated through sources, and its episodes are notable elements of the topic, with their plots being verifiable through the episodes themselves. The content on these episodes cannot rationally be expected to grow if their articles are not accessible to ordinary editors, and it is moreover a needless disservice to readers to not provide information that is clearly sought after, and which has already been written and could be presented to them at any time. Everyking 06:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
I have not read every one of these articles (Please, no!) but I looked at a bunch. As I view it they do fail to establish notability. The plot summaries are more ‘well’ developed — which to me is a good reason to trim them down; don't tell the whole thing.
Several points in the above discussion deserve comment. The concept of ‘inherited notability’ is one that needs to be dispensed with. In most cases a tv show itself will indeed be notable, but individual episodes will not be. There may be cases where an individual episode can be established as notable for any number of reasons, which is fine. This would involve reliable sources that are specific to the episode. The other point I'd like to comment on is the endless links to imdb.com and tv.com — the presence of these links is fine, but they do not amount to reliable sources; most of the ones I've looked at for specific episodes are lame in the extreme. -- Jack Merridew 09:44, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
I have rewritten this Friends episode to demonstrate that kind of out-of-universe notability (won an episode-specific award, most watched episode of the series, produced a spin-off show) - probably any of those on their own would be grounds for arguing notability. Other clear examples: Trapped in the Closet (South Park), garnered significant media attention and was the subject of a debate about censorship, etc..., Deep Space Homer produced a culturally significant meme and has been the subject of external references, similarly Happy Days Episode 89 (Fonzie jumps the Shark! - no article) and Point of View (the M*A*S*H episode, no article) for its contribution to and role in television production techniques, etc..., etc.... In my reading of the Episode guideline, the mindless pablum of a DVD commentary track in no way qualifies as out-of-universe unless it can be demonstrably shown that the material itself has notability beyond the narrow confines of the show. I note that two of those episodes I cited do not yet have articles, while we nonetheless have all the highly unnotable articles above.... That simply confirms my view that this is fan-driven content (fine in-and-of-itself) that cares nothing for the guidelines and principles that have been established by consensus across the community (unacceptable). Eusebeus 14:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Do we have any kind of consensus developing here? Is there at least a general agreement that the episodes for which we have found sources should remain? Everyking 05:53, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Sounds like the same ol' discussion, but I think the pages should stay. Recent episodes are easy to add referenced info to, but people don't bother unless they're put on the chopping block. - Peregrine Fisher 19:32, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Close how? The discussion above seems to me to be pretty evenly split, a classic example of "no consensus". I know that I'm coming in late, but I'd like to remind participants of something Jimbo said a long time ago. Some of you have seen me quote this before, but some of you probably haven't. It's from the earliest incarnation of Wikipedia:Importance:
As Everyking notes above, this is essentially an inclusionist/deletionist debate. My own leanings are generally inclusionist, but I do accept the general principle that not every television episode necessarily deserves its own Wikipedia page. On the subject of Hannah Montana episodes, I am agnostic, since I know next to nothing about the series. (Unlike some editors, however, I wouldn't dare to suggest that my own ignorance is evidence that the series or its episodes are not notable.)
A question I would ask is whether a printed Hannah Montana episode guide exists. If it does, and includes more than cast lists and plot summaries for each episode, I would consider that evidence that Hannah Montana episodes have the potential to meet the requirements of WP:RS and WP:N. If not, I would consider that evidence that most individual Hannah Montana episodes (with the exception of the ones noted above) do not have the potential to meet the requirements of WP:RS or WP:N. Would that be a reasonable conclusion to draw? — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 06:27, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't know about anyone else, but I have not been able to find a printed episode guide. If there's nothing else to be said for this matter, we'll be adding a ratings column to the list of eps article, and redirecting once again. -- Ned Scott 05:12, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
As much as I want to keep them, let's just get some closure and sort the mess out later. WAVY 10 14:59, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
We have another issue; not all of the episodes were included in the discussion list and I've not done anything to those (or the block under Neilsan ratings). These are mostly at the end of the LOE and may have been created since the original list was generated or may have been redirected at that moment... I believe that they should be included in this review. -- Jack Merridew 14:05, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Additional columns can be added to the episode list template by using Aux1=, Aux2=, or Aux3=. -- Ned Scott 19:07, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
What got me thinking about the notability issue is the challenge being made to the Buffy episodes on similar grounds. That particular show is being held up as an example to emulate for series TV even to the point of featured article status. I wonder what the point is overall. We have articles on each of the characters. A TV series is notable solely because it is being broadcast. What is missing from an encyclopedic perspective is complete verifiable information about what is already passed the notability test, which the series has; the episodes add to that. We don't have in the summary the work product information of the people in the credits, the guest cast, the writer, director. We should have that. We don't need a Readers Digest version of the episode, a trivia section, or a goofs sections but we should have a place for important data from the primary source - the episode itself, about the people who created the show. -- NrDg 20:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
I've started adding Writer, Director and Guest stars to the season 1 table. Let me know if there are any objections before I do much more work on this. -- NrDg 00:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
I heard that Dolly Parton and Vicki Lawrence are guest starring in the same episode together here. Is there anywhere to put the info? Mouseinthehouse 17:56, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Why is there not a page for this episode if all the pages have been restored? Mouseinthehouse 17:56, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
In the article it mentions that the name Everybody Was Best-Friend Fighting comes from the song Kung Fu Fighting twice. It says it in the first paragraph and again in the trivia section. Smileyface 12 91 22:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
The episodes on the separate page for I Want You to Want Me...To Go to Florida has Everybody Was Best-Friend Fighting as the next show, followed by Me and Mr. Jonas. Where did Song Sung Bad (the one with...for now, as an earlier version listed Lily as trying to start a singing career of her own...Lily being supposed to record something for her mom) come in (assuming this has even been confirmed)? WAVY 10 15:58, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
who ever keeps on redirecting the episode articles to the list of episode page, STOP DOING THAT!!!! AND WHO EVER DID THIS, PUT THOSE PAGES BACK UP, NOOOOOOOOOOWW!!!!! 24.186.246.59 at 7:47 PM on July 24, 2007.
To all who keep trying to revive the episode links...PLEASE STOP IT! Consensus was to merge (I was one fighting to save a few of them), and unless enough information for it to pass WP:N, don't play "Lazarus" with these articles. WAVY 10 01:07, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
We really need to edit the Hannah Montana episodes. We also need the screen shots.
It's clear from the above discussion that no consensus was reached, yet somebody redirected the articles anyway and even closed off the discussion, as if to say no further discussion shall be permitted. Who was responsible for that? I propose that all the articles be restored and that the discussion be reopened. In particular, discussion needs to continue regarding the episodes for which secondary sources were found, because I believe consensus can be reached (and may already exist) to keep those. Everyking 04:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
(outdent) Well, thats the way things currently work. I suppose the closing could be undone and a {{ wider attention}} tag could be placed. i (said) (did) 05:20, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
I should point out, this was not a discussion to see who wanted to keep the articles or not. This was a discussion to see if they were notable or not. No one was able to assert any reasonable level of notability. -- Ned Scott 05:33, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
A few people said the pages should be redirected, a few said they shouldn't be redirected, a few references were added, and then the pages were redirected. It's the classic deletionist vs. inclusionist argument. Refs have no effect on the argument. We need some new rules. Something like, every time a reference is added, no redirecteing is allowed. - Peregrine Fisher 08:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
KEEP I came into this debate late and am new at editing so I tend to go with what others say. I brought up a concern about losing information that I think belong in a complete article about a TV series and was effectively overridden. So I compromised in a way I really didn't want to. I took the statement that this issue was closed as a given and did not feel comfortable enough with my gut reason to debate the issues against Wikipedia lawyers. Given that I was misled. I will state strongly that I want the article pages back. Add me to the list who want to keep them.
I think that notability must be based on the FACT that something is notable to a large interested group. We can't use original research in the articles but I see no reason not to use original research to establish notability. I don't care what Wiki policy says - these articles ARE notable in an absolute sense, even if some good secondary source has not blessed it. The fact that there is significant discussion on the web about them DOES establish that they are notable.
From an other perspective these articles are an organization method of presenting a complete article about something that is established as notable, an Emmy nominated TV Series. This is NOT inherited notability, multiple pages are needed to the cover the subject in the way that is needed. We shouldn't have to establish notability every time we chose to change organizational structure. -- NrDg 13:06, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
As Ned commented above, no one established any notability for the episode articles. The discussion had gone quiet after several comments were made to the effect that they would then be redirected. I redirected them and added the viewers column to the LOE as per others comments. Hey, they're all still there; this isn't about 'delete'. I will refrain from further edits on this score and see where this goes. They have not established their notability. -- Jack Merridew 13:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
I see that Achy Jakey Heart has appeared. It will be interesting to see how this evolves. -- Jack Merridew 15:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
I just noticed that there are two episodes listed with production code '123' and not knowing where these numbers came from have no way of being sure how to fix this. -- Jack Merridew 09:57, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I removed co-star credited actors from the guest star list. I created the guest star list from watching the episode credits and the actors listed are in the credited order. If someone wishes to create a co-star list, that is fine. I was planning on doing that too when I had time but if you do so please list them in credited order as the order is meaningfully. -- NrDg 12:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
This is just me but I'm not sure whether this is a real episode or not. It seems highly unlikely that they would have an episode based around terrorism. I may be wrong but this is my opinion. Race t 16:23, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone know why some of the "Songs Featured:" won't appear? I could swear that I saw some in "edit this page" that didn't appear. ZSoraz 23:13, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |