This page 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. |
Would it be appropriate to link to the NBC Universal-run site hulu.com for each episode that you can stream from there? It's legitimate (again, it's run by NBC Universal) and it would provide the ultimate context for each episode listing here. There could even be a, "Watch Now" link or something for each one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sammysunset ( talk • contribs) 23:09, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I remenber back in the day that there where episode pics, now some ass removed it. I think some should be a rebel by not listening to the admins and put the pics back-- SoldierOfColbert 05:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC) I seriouly mean people should mot be a nerd and just leave the pics on.
According to the NBC press release [1] the premiere is indeed "Gay Witch Hunt", as someone already added. If you find any others from NBC or a reliable source, feel free to add it to the list but if you don't know what episode number it is, just put TBA. Thanks- Puppet125 01:07, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Changed this, but "Grief Counseling" and "Initiation" have been switched, so Grief Counseling will air next week, possibly followed by Iniation, I'm not completely sure.
The section on this summer's webisodes say that Michael won't be in any of these episodes, as events in the season finale will render it inappropriate for him to appear. However, I didn't really see anything that showed why Michael wouldn't be in the office this summer. I mean, obviously Steve Carrell probably has to work on other projects, but from a plot perspective, I don't see how it works quite yet...
Question: I've been wondering. Since the webisodes take place between Season 2 and 3, should they be moved there or should they remain separate from the episode list? Discuss. Williamnilly 22:32, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
So should I change it or not? - Puppet125
Okay, this is starting to become an issue. I've moved the webisodes back again to the bottom of the page, where I think they should stay for now. This page is called List of The Office (U.S. TV series) episodes, not List of The Office (US) media (a la List of The Simpsons media). It's already sketchy that we have the webisodes listed here; we should at least keep them separate since they're not official network episodes. They're a completely different media outlet. If you think there should be a media page, by all means, start one. (The 2006 Prime Time Preview info would finally have a home, too.) But stop moving them without discussing your rationale. Williamnilly 06:13, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
What is that function that when you click a link it brings you to a certain part of the page? I believe the character page uses it, when you click on a name in the box at the bottom. We should put one of those between 2 and 3, stating this is where the webisodes are and then have it link down there. Puppet125 19:59, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
It seems like a complete break from the continuity of the websiode list when the chart doesn't include director or writer, but the chart for the seasons does. Even though its the same director and writer throughout, continuity is important. 69.141.220.219
I took the CSI ep list as a model. However, I have made a few "improvements" (?).
Any other suggestions for formatting? Also, at this point, the main article does not link to this list. I think we should get the format set and fill in the data before doing so. -- Jeremy Butler 12:58, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
In the main Office article, we started the second season episode numbers with "one." I think more common practice is to number them sequentially across seasons--thus showing the total number of eps. So, Season Two should begin with "seven." Any opinions? -- Jeremy Butler 13:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
There is a Episode list style guide, but it's not very extensive. I think the format we've come up with fits it pretty well. -- Jeremy Butler 18:55, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
I started adding screen captures for each episode. So far I have done 2.01, 2.02, 2.03, and 2.05. My DVR didn't record episode 4 or 8 correctly, so if someone else can get screen captures of those that would help. I tried to find one scene in each episode that summed up the story, so if you looked at that one screen you would instantly remember what the episode was about. Jtrost 19:27, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
Is there an ideal size for screenshots? I think 576x320 is a good compromise between file size and legibility. Like this:
'Course, then it can scale down to 180x100 for the thumbnail in the ep list:
And, if someone clicks the thumbnail, they get a decent sized image on the Image: page. -- Jeremy Butler 13:18, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Hmmmm... checking my numbers, I see that 569x320 would be a more accurate representation of the 1.78:1 or 16:9 aspect ratio that The Office is shot in. (I still think 320 pixels is a good height to use.) I'll try that in the next screenshot I do. -- Jeremy Butler 13:18, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Oops, I uploaded a screenshot for "Booze Cruise" before realizing Jtrost had already put one up. I like his, but is there any sentiment for replacing it with this one? The only advantage to my image is that it's a close-up and easier to see as a thumbnail. -- Jeremy Butler 16:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
I made a small change to the format of the table. I made the background color for the episode description pure white. I think this helps seperate the episodes better visually. I got the idea from List of The Simpsons episodes. If people don't agree then my change can be reverted. Qutezuce 06:15, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Thought I'd gather the various Wikipedia policies/guidelines on ep lists here:
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jeremy Butler ( talk • contribs) .
What about adding a succesion box to each episode page (see the bottom of Baby boomer for an example) so that the next/previous episode can easily be navigated to from each episode page? Are people in favour of this idea? Qutezuce 01:57, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Williamnilly created a very nice infobox for use on individual The Office episode pages that includes a previous/next episode link. Two changes I think would improve the box. First, make the "Previous Episode" and "Next Episode" boxes side by side, rather then one on top of the other, so that their positions better indicate the previous/next duality. It will require some tricks so that the previous/next episode boxes are equal width but don't force the cells above them to also have equal width. Secondly, do we want to include one episode number that spans all seasons or have a season number and and episode (in that season) number? I prefer the latter. Qutezuce 07:47, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Excellent work! I think we can put the infobox on all the pages now. Qutezuce 22:23, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Nice job everyone. I'm very impressed. I'll contribute what I can to these episodes. My only concern is that no sources are not properly cited under trivia. Adding an external link is not a proper citation. Please review WP:CITE on how to properly cite information. Jtrost ( T | C | #) 22:31, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
I moved "The Secret" because someone added a film called "The Secret" as well. Maybe we should premptively move some of the other episodes that have "common" names, or all of them, to make it uniform. Qutezuce 21:37, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
In order to resolve the long standing debate over fair use of screenshots on List of Lost episodes, I am now trying to resolve the issue under the belief that the issue is an opinionated matter and not a matter of policy. Talk:List of Lost episodes#Fair use criteria number 8. I ask that people share their comments, but please try to keep the conversation in this section focused.
One thing that works against us is that the conversation tries to defend too many points at once. Try not to respond to comments about other aspects of the debate, and just take this one step at a time. Basically, respond if you think this is an opinionated matter regarding policy point 8 of WP:FUC or not.
I believe if we can break through on the issue of point 8, the rest will fall into place. -- Ned Scott 08:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
I removed all of the screenshots from this page because I am hoping that people who like the screenshots will participate in the argument over at Talk:List of Lost episodes. I love them, but we need more people in the discussion to take the haters down. 154.20.217.225 18:41, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Maybe I'm making too much of this, but the screenshots for episodes 1 and 3 of the new season seem a little revealing to me. Michael's kiss to Oscar is the uncomfortable climax of the season premeire while Dwight's punishment in episode 3 is intended to be the revealing payoff to the last joke in the episode. They're both good images that successfully capture the general themes of their respective episode plotlines, but I consider them both spoilers.
Does anyone agree? Pele Merengue 04:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
On the The Office main article it has 25 scheduled episodes for season 3 but I can't find a source. Does anybody know where that's been reported? - 75.38.115.132 16:09, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
How do we know these are the correct production codes? Rarely are the episodes aired in the exact same order they are produced. If there isn't a correct source that lists the prodution codes, shouldn't we leave them blank or replace them with "TBA" until we figure it out? Pele Merengue 22:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't even see why production codes are needed. Puppet125 02:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
The production codes listed on the NBC site http://www.nbc.com/The_Office/episodes/ are four digits and disagree with the numbering here in various places, eg. Benihana Christmas is 3009, not 310/311. BaldAdonis 03:21, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Does " A Benihana Christmas" really need to have 2 production codes? It was made as one episode and aired as one episode. - Deep Shadow 16:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Can people please stop changing the production code numbers for season 3 so they appear in numerical order?! The way Thedemonhog had them was the same as the codes on the official website. Chismeister, don't change them again please. - Deep Shadow 03:56, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Any idea why the production codes ("Episode ID") on iTunes don't match the ones on NBC's website? 68.73.151.215 00:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
The production codes on the NBC site are kind of hidden - you have to hover over the screenshot to see them. If the consensus is that these aren't really production codes, then I stand corrected, but they seem to be production-code-like (the numbers aren't in air-date order). -- Raymondc0 01:30, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
An unregistered user went through and changed all the production codes without explanation (both on this page and on the individual episode pages). Does anybody know what the deal is? Is there some alternate source for production codes? Or is somebody just messing around? -- Raymondc0 16:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
whats the source for all these future episodes? it seems like anyone could just make it up. Skhatri2005 00:28, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
While anyone could just make it up, I do find them to be very convincing. They're most certainly legit. 201.81.252.13 05:57, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Time will prove me right, GrahameS. Meet you here after the episodes air. 201.81.252.13 04:31, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
I took away the link of Caroline Williams from the writers. The Caroline Williams who writes for The Office is a different actor/writer.
no source for the date, I suggest it gets deleted until an NBC press release comes out. I know theres been cast sheets for it, but still, no proof no pudding. Skhatri2005 00:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
I have seen several sources say that there will be an episode called "Safety Training", but not necessarily that it will be the next episode. I suggest that the title of the next episode be left at TBA until there is a press release. Kangotang 17:49, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
46. The Negotiation
47. Safety Training
48. Woman Appreciation
don’t put this in the article till NBC has a press release, but i'm sure those are the names.--
72.146.210.253 19:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Skhatri2005 05:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
There was a break about a month or two long before tonight's episode. I think this is the start of season 4. Has anyone done any research on this? Randomfrenchie 01:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
confirmed by NBC http://nbcumv.com/release_detail.nbc/entertainment-20070413000000-nbcprimetimeschedu.html Skhatri2005 21:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Come on people, you can't just start an edit war. If there's a discrepency, bring it up on the talk page. That's what it's here for. As far as the screenshots, they've all been shown as fair use. They are only used in the context of discussing the episode in question. Although they are not free, as long as used in that context, and no free equivelent is available, then it's fair use. I'm going to put them back for now, but if you don't like it, don't just revert. Post here. — Fumo7887 ( talk • contribs) 15:47, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
{{ editprotected}} The "Writer" column for the most recently-aired episode, "Beach Games", still lists TBA, even though it's been revealed that it's Jennifer Celotta & Greg Daniels. Could an admin please make that addition?
Also, I think an understanding has been reached above, and this page can safely reverted to at least semi-protected, as everyone now understands images aren't fair use on list pages. -- 216.57.222.134 19:56, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
I am going through several articles and changing instances of "Dunder-Mifflin" to "Dunder Mifflin" (no hyphen) as it is the proper "spelling" of the company name (see Talk page at Dunder Mifflin). Just leaving a note to say that I've gone through this page. :) Fieryrogue 20:38, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
I've had this thought for a while, but couldn't figture out exactly how I wanted to do it. My thought was to note the "supersized" 40 minute episodes with a "†" symbol and the hour-long episodes with a "‡". For example...
Title | Writer(s) | Director | Original Airdate | Production Code (filming order) |
# |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
"Fun Run" [1]‡ | Greg Daniels | TBD | September 27, 2007 | TBA | 52 |
The problem I'm having is where the footnote should go that explains what these mean. Anyone have any ideas? I think varying runtimes is definitely something that should be noted on this list, and a symbol is the easiest way to do that without having to explain it in the text description. — Fumo7887 ( talk • contribs) 04:56, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
All of the episodes of this series fail the notability guidelines for television episodes. The way for these articles to be improved is through the inclusion of real-world information from reliable sources to assert notability. That is unlikely to happen, and these only contain overly long plot summaries, trivia, and quotes. Per that, they need to be a small part of this list. If there are no objections, these will be redirected soon. TTN 12:27, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a boilerplate bit of advice to editors of television episode articles which have come under Wikipedia:Television episodes/Review.
There is fairly widespread consensus that not all television episodes are sufficiently notable to merit articles of their own in Wikipedia. In the interest of fairness, the Wikipedia:Television episodes/Review process has been established, to determine whether it's possible to establish out-of-universe importance and real-world context for television episode articles. For example, after uncontroversial discussion here, articles on individual episodes of The Simple Life were turned into redirects to List of The Simple Life episodes.
If you're interested in keeping episode articles, the key thing is to find reliable sources discussing individual episodes. Sources which may help establish notability for these episodes include reviews in newspapers, discussion in specialist magazines, and detailed episode guides. (Some of my fellow editors feel that episode guides aren't sufficiently independent of the subject to establish notability, but I disagree, especially for professionally published episode guides.) The key thing for improvement of these articles is to include some real-world content (ratings are a good start) and information beyond plot summaries and cast lists. If there are any books published about this series, see if the production or impact of individual episodes are discussed, and add that information to the episode articles. If someone used sources like these books on a handful of these episode articles, to indicate that the episodes of this series have received sufficient coverage in reliable sources that any episode of the series could have encyclopedic coverage, I'd support leaving the other articles as they are, because the potential would have been demonstrated. I hope that interested editors will take up this challenge, and improve the articles so that they won't be redirected.— Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 21:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Recently nbc posted a video detailing the summer vacations of the office members. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.213.249.125 ( talk) 02:38, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
I agree with the merge with List of The Office (U.S. TV series) episodes since there is now an article on the mental health topic Grief counseling. One alternative would to cancel the re-direct from Grief Counseling (The Office episode) leaving that as the final article on the episode-- Ziji ( talk email) 02:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Checking the Season 3 production codes, I noticed the absence of a 3014. Can someone explain this? J-ſtan Talk Contribs 20:07, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
The individual episode articles have been listed for a merge for a fair amount of time now. Almost nothing has been done to assert real-world notability over that period and as a result these need to be merged. To the editors above who feel that they have !voted against such an action, it is important to remember what consensus means:
At the moment, consensus still requires real-world context to establish notability. If editors feel individual episode articles should be kept they should
1. work to introduce such content, or
2. weigh in on the debates at WP:FICT, WP:EPISODE and WP:WAF ASAP.
So far, in those discussions, the suggestion that real-world notability and reliable, third party sources not be standard criteria for stand-alone articles has been largely rejected. Interested editors, however, are encouraged to air their views.
Meanwhile, at the risk of being repetitive, editors need to understand that, absent some major change in our basic policies, real-world, out-of-universe notability must be asserted. Consequently, individual comments made here are, in this regard, irrelevant since they fall outside of community consensus. Editors who feel strongly should direct their attention to the main debates centring around policy where that consensus is determined.
Sorry for the bolding and repetition, but it is important that editors who feel strongly about this issue ensure they participate in fora where their views can be considered. This is not such a forum and as the current discussion is unfolding, the individual episode pages will be merged. Eusebeus 23:30, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
I know blogs are generally not acceptable or reliable sources, but Elgar works for an HR firm and provides background information on her claims. Notthegoatseguy 15:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
I notice that every debate about this topic usually has nay sayers that believe that either no one listens or that the information is useful. And the opposite side tends to yell "REAL WORLD INFORMATION, BLARGH!" and not much else. I can't help but think that this will soon become the bureaucratic form of WP:ILIKEIT. Nevertheless, there are many other places for in-depth information with less stringent regulations. Pacific Coast Highway { Trick • or treat!} 02:22, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm a huge fan of The Office but also agree that episode guides are non-encyclopedic and do not fit the Wikipedia guidelines. Selected aspects of a show may be encyclopedic when they become part of the cultural language (e.g. "Soup Nazi") but episode guides aren't part of the cultural language. The Office has
Dunderpedia, just as other popular shows have their own sites for episode guides and other non-encyclopedic fan material (
The Simpsons,
Battlestar Galactica,
Babylon 5). So far, the arguments against merging have been of the form "But I like it this way." Wikipedia is not "a list of everything people like." There are guidelines for inclusion, and those guidelines determine what goes in and what stays out. If you don't like the guidelines, then work to change the Wikipedia guidelines or move to Dunderpedia which has laxer guidelines. "But it cramps my style" is not a valid argument for inclusion. --
Raymondc0 10:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I would side with merging individual episode articles by season. Each episode doesn't need more than two well-written paragraphs to describe its plot (more for 30-50 minute episodes than the standard 22, of course), and Wikipedia's guidelines pretty clearly state that episodes should be individually notable to merit their own article. As for the trivia currently in the article pages, such is discouraged by Wikipedia guidelines. -
Chardish 23:30, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Per the discussion here, I will redirect to the episode articles to the main LOE page soon. Interested editors may wish to transwiki the information to a wikia, as discussed in WP:FICT. Eusebeus ( talk) 16:02, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
It should be easy to write original summaries, so that this page violates copyright less. – thedemonhog talk • edits • box 05:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
When clicking the link for the take your daughter to work day episode, it links to something else, could someone please fix this so it links to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Take_Your_Daughter_to_Work_Day_%28The_Office_episode%29
thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.80.254.25 ( talk) 12:27, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
This page 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. |
This page 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. |
Would it be appropriate to link to the NBC Universal-run site hulu.com for each episode that you can stream from there? It's legitimate (again, it's run by NBC Universal) and it would provide the ultimate context for each episode listing here. There could even be a, "Watch Now" link or something for each one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sammysunset ( talk • contribs) 23:09, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I remenber back in the day that there where episode pics, now some ass removed it. I think some should be a rebel by not listening to the admins and put the pics back-- SoldierOfColbert 05:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC) I seriouly mean people should mot be a nerd and just leave the pics on.
According to the NBC press release [1] the premiere is indeed "Gay Witch Hunt", as someone already added. If you find any others from NBC or a reliable source, feel free to add it to the list but if you don't know what episode number it is, just put TBA. Thanks- Puppet125 01:07, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Changed this, but "Grief Counseling" and "Initiation" have been switched, so Grief Counseling will air next week, possibly followed by Iniation, I'm not completely sure.
The section on this summer's webisodes say that Michael won't be in any of these episodes, as events in the season finale will render it inappropriate for him to appear. However, I didn't really see anything that showed why Michael wouldn't be in the office this summer. I mean, obviously Steve Carrell probably has to work on other projects, but from a plot perspective, I don't see how it works quite yet...
Question: I've been wondering. Since the webisodes take place between Season 2 and 3, should they be moved there or should they remain separate from the episode list? Discuss. Williamnilly 22:32, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
So should I change it or not? - Puppet125
Okay, this is starting to become an issue. I've moved the webisodes back again to the bottom of the page, where I think they should stay for now. This page is called List of The Office (U.S. TV series) episodes, not List of The Office (US) media (a la List of The Simpsons media). It's already sketchy that we have the webisodes listed here; we should at least keep them separate since they're not official network episodes. They're a completely different media outlet. If you think there should be a media page, by all means, start one. (The 2006 Prime Time Preview info would finally have a home, too.) But stop moving them without discussing your rationale. Williamnilly 06:13, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
What is that function that when you click a link it brings you to a certain part of the page? I believe the character page uses it, when you click on a name in the box at the bottom. We should put one of those between 2 and 3, stating this is where the webisodes are and then have it link down there. Puppet125 19:59, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
It seems like a complete break from the continuity of the websiode list when the chart doesn't include director or writer, but the chart for the seasons does. Even though its the same director and writer throughout, continuity is important. 69.141.220.219
I took the CSI ep list as a model. However, I have made a few "improvements" (?).
Any other suggestions for formatting? Also, at this point, the main article does not link to this list. I think we should get the format set and fill in the data before doing so. -- Jeremy Butler 12:58, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
In the main Office article, we started the second season episode numbers with "one." I think more common practice is to number them sequentially across seasons--thus showing the total number of eps. So, Season Two should begin with "seven." Any opinions? -- Jeremy Butler 13:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
There is a Episode list style guide, but it's not very extensive. I think the format we've come up with fits it pretty well. -- Jeremy Butler 18:55, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
I started adding screen captures for each episode. So far I have done 2.01, 2.02, 2.03, and 2.05. My DVR didn't record episode 4 or 8 correctly, so if someone else can get screen captures of those that would help. I tried to find one scene in each episode that summed up the story, so if you looked at that one screen you would instantly remember what the episode was about. Jtrost 19:27, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
Is there an ideal size for screenshots? I think 576x320 is a good compromise between file size and legibility. Like this:
'Course, then it can scale down to 180x100 for the thumbnail in the ep list:
And, if someone clicks the thumbnail, they get a decent sized image on the Image: page. -- Jeremy Butler 13:18, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Hmmmm... checking my numbers, I see that 569x320 would be a more accurate representation of the 1.78:1 or 16:9 aspect ratio that The Office is shot in. (I still think 320 pixels is a good height to use.) I'll try that in the next screenshot I do. -- Jeremy Butler 13:18, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Oops, I uploaded a screenshot for "Booze Cruise" before realizing Jtrost had already put one up. I like his, but is there any sentiment for replacing it with this one? The only advantage to my image is that it's a close-up and easier to see as a thumbnail. -- Jeremy Butler 16:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
I made a small change to the format of the table. I made the background color for the episode description pure white. I think this helps seperate the episodes better visually. I got the idea from List of The Simpsons episodes. If people don't agree then my change can be reverted. Qutezuce 06:15, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Thought I'd gather the various Wikipedia policies/guidelines on ep lists here:
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jeremy Butler ( talk • contribs) .
What about adding a succesion box to each episode page (see the bottom of Baby boomer for an example) so that the next/previous episode can easily be navigated to from each episode page? Are people in favour of this idea? Qutezuce 01:57, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Williamnilly created a very nice infobox for use on individual The Office episode pages that includes a previous/next episode link. Two changes I think would improve the box. First, make the "Previous Episode" and "Next Episode" boxes side by side, rather then one on top of the other, so that their positions better indicate the previous/next duality. It will require some tricks so that the previous/next episode boxes are equal width but don't force the cells above them to also have equal width. Secondly, do we want to include one episode number that spans all seasons or have a season number and and episode (in that season) number? I prefer the latter. Qutezuce 07:47, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Excellent work! I think we can put the infobox on all the pages now. Qutezuce 22:23, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Nice job everyone. I'm very impressed. I'll contribute what I can to these episodes. My only concern is that no sources are not properly cited under trivia. Adding an external link is not a proper citation. Please review WP:CITE on how to properly cite information. Jtrost ( T | C | #) 22:31, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
I moved "The Secret" because someone added a film called "The Secret" as well. Maybe we should premptively move some of the other episodes that have "common" names, or all of them, to make it uniform. Qutezuce 21:37, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
In order to resolve the long standing debate over fair use of screenshots on List of Lost episodes, I am now trying to resolve the issue under the belief that the issue is an opinionated matter and not a matter of policy. Talk:List of Lost episodes#Fair use criteria number 8. I ask that people share their comments, but please try to keep the conversation in this section focused.
One thing that works against us is that the conversation tries to defend too many points at once. Try not to respond to comments about other aspects of the debate, and just take this one step at a time. Basically, respond if you think this is an opinionated matter regarding policy point 8 of WP:FUC or not.
I believe if we can break through on the issue of point 8, the rest will fall into place. -- Ned Scott 08:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
I removed all of the screenshots from this page because I am hoping that people who like the screenshots will participate in the argument over at Talk:List of Lost episodes. I love them, but we need more people in the discussion to take the haters down. 154.20.217.225 18:41, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Maybe I'm making too much of this, but the screenshots for episodes 1 and 3 of the new season seem a little revealing to me. Michael's kiss to Oscar is the uncomfortable climax of the season premeire while Dwight's punishment in episode 3 is intended to be the revealing payoff to the last joke in the episode. They're both good images that successfully capture the general themes of their respective episode plotlines, but I consider them both spoilers.
Does anyone agree? Pele Merengue 04:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
On the The Office main article it has 25 scheduled episodes for season 3 but I can't find a source. Does anybody know where that's been reported? - 75.38.115.132 16:09, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
How do we know these are the correct production codes? Rarely are the episodes aired in the exact same order they are produced. If there isn't a correct source that lists the prodution codes, shouldn't we leave them blank or replace them with "TBA" until we figure it out? Pele Merengue 22:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't even see why production codes are needed. Puppet125 02:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
The production codes listed on the NBC site http://www.nbc.com/The_Office/episodes/ are four digits and disagree with the numbering here in various places, eg. Benihana Christmas is 3009, not 310/311. BaldAdonis 03:21, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Does " A Benihana Christmas" really need to have 2 production codes? It was made as one episode and aired as one episode. - Deep Shadow 16:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Can people please stop changing the production code numbers for season 3 so they appear in numerical order?! The way Thedemonhog had them was the same as the codes on the official website. Chismeister, don't change them again please. - Deep Shadow 03:56, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Any idea why the production codes ("Episode ID") on iTunes don't match the ones on NBC's website? 68.73.151.215 00:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
The production codes on the NBC site are kind of hidden - you have to hover over the screenshot to see them. If the consensus is that these aren't really production codes, then I stand corrected, but they seem to be production-code-like (the numbers aren't in air-date order). -- Raymondc0 01:30, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
An unregistered user went through and changed all the production codes without explanation (both on this page and on the individual episode pages). Does anybody know what the deal is? Is there some alternate source for production codes? Or is somebody just messing around? -- Raymondc0 16:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
whats the source for all these future episodes? it seems like anyone could just make it up. Skhatri2005 00:28, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
While anyone could just make it up, I do find them to be very convincing. They're most certainly legit. 201.81.252.13 05:57, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Time will prove me right, GrahameS. Meet you here after the episodes air. 201.81.252.13 04:31, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
I took away the link of Caroline Williams from the writers. The Caroline Williams who writes for The Office is a different actor/writer.
no source for the date, I suggest it gets deleted until an NBC press release comes out. I know theres been cast sheets for it, but still, no proof no pudding. Skhatri2005 00:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
I have seen several sources say that there will be an episode called "Safety Training", but not necessarily that it will be the next episode. I suggest that the title of the next episode be left at TBA until there is a press release. Kangotang 17:49, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
46. The Negotiation
47. Safety Training
48. Woman Appreciation
don’t put this in the article till NBC has a press release, but i'm sure those are the names.--
72.146.210.253 19:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Skhatri2005 05:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
There was a break about a month or two long before tonight's episode. I think this is the start of season 4. Has anyone done any research on this? Randomfrenchie 01:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
confirmed by NBC http://nbcumv.com/release_detail.nbc/entertainment-20070413000000-nbcprimetimeschedu.html Skhatri2005 21:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Come on people, you can't just start an edit war. If there's a discrepency, bring it up on the talk page. That's what it's here for. As far as the screenshots, they've all been shown as fair use. They are only used in the context of discussing the episode in question. Although they are not free, as long as used in that context, and no free equivelent is available, then it's fair use. I'm going to put them back for now, but if you don't like it, don't just revert. Post here. — Fumo7887 ( talk • contribs) 15:47, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
{{ editprotected}} The "Writer" column for the most recently-aired episode, "Beach Games", still lists TBA, even though it's been revealed that it's Jennifer Celotta & Greg Daniels. Could an admin please make that addition?
Also, I think an understanding has been reached above, and this page can safely reverted to at least semi-protected, as everyone now understands images aren't fair use on list pages. -- 216.57.222.134 19:56, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
I am going through several articles and changing instances of "Dunder-Mifflin" to "Dunder Mifflin" (no hyphen) as it is the proper "spelling" of the company name (see Talk page at Dunder Mifflin). Just leaving a note to say that I've gone through this page. :) Fieryrogue 20:38, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
I've had this thought for a while, but couldn't figture out exactly how I wanted to do it. My thought was to note the "supersized" 40 minute episodes with a "†" symbol and the hour-long episodes with a "‡". For example...
Title | Writer(s) | Director | Original Airdate | Production Code (filming order) |
# |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
"Fun Run" [1]‡ | Greg Daniels | TBD | September 27, 2007 | TBA | 52 |
The problem I'm having is where the footnote should go that explains what these mean. Anyone have any ideas? I think varying runtimes is definitely something that should be noted on this list, and a symbol is the easiest way to do that without having to explain it in the text description. — Fumo7887 ( talk • contribs) 04:56, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
All of the episodes of this series fail the notability guidelines for television episodes. The way for these articles to be improved is through the inclusion of real-world information from reliable sources to assert notability. That is unlikely to happen, and these only contain overly long plot summaries, trivia, and quotes. Per that, they need to be a small part of this list. If there are no objections, these will be redirected soon. TTN 12:27, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a boilerplate bit of advice to editors of television episode articles which have come under Wikipedia:Television episodes/Review.
There is fairly widespread consensus that not all television episodes are sufficiently notable to merit articles of their own in Wikipedia. In the interest of fairness, the Wikipedia:Television episodes/Review process has been established, to determine whether it's possible to establish out-of-universe importance and real-world context for television episode articles. For example, after uncontroversial discussion here, articles on individual episodes of The Simple Life were turned into redirects to List of The Simple Life episodes.
If you're interested in keeping episode articles, the key thing is to find reliable sources discussing individual episodes. Sources which may help establish notability for these episodes include reviews in newspapers, discussion in specialist magazines, and detailed episode guides. (Some of my fellow editors feel that episode guides aren't sufficiently independent of the subject to establish notability, but I disagree, especially for professionally published episode guides.) The key thing for improvement of these articles is to include some real-world content (ratings are a good start) and information beyond plot summaries and cast lists. If there are any books published about this series, see if the production or impact of individual episodes are discussed, and add that information to the episode articles. If someone used sources like these books on a handful of these episode articles, to indicate that the episodes of this series have received sufficient coverage in reliable sources that any episode of the series could have encyclopedic coverage, I'd support leaving the other articles as they are, because the potential would have been demonstrated. I hope that interested editors will take up this challenge, and improve the articles so that they won't be redirected.— Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 21:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Recently nbc posted a video detailing the summer vacations of the office members. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.213.249.125 ( talk) 02:38, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
I agree with the merge with List of The Office (U.S. TV series) episodes since there is now an article on the mental health topic Grief counseling. One alternative would to cancel the re-direct from Grief Counseling (The Office episode) leaving that as the final article on the episode-- Ziji ( talk email) 02:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Checking the Season 3 production codes, I noticed the absence of a 3014. Can someone explain this? J-ſtan Talk Contribs 20:07, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
The individual episode articles have been listed for a merge for a fair amount of time now. Almost nothing has been done to assert real-world notability over that period and as a result these need to be merged. To the editors above who feel that they have !voted against such an action, it is important to remember what consensus means:
At the moment, consensus still requires real-world context to establish notability. If editors feel individual episode articles should be kept they should
1. work to introduce such content, or
2. weigh in on the debates at WP:FICT, WP:EPISODE and WP:WAF ASAP.
So far, in those discussions, the suggestion that real-world notability and reliable, third party sources not be standard criteria for stand-alone articles has been largely rejected. Interested editors, however, are encouraged to air their views.
Meanwhile, at the risk of being repetitive, editors need to understand that, absent some major change in our basic policies, real-world, out-of-universe notability must be asserted. Consequently, individual comments made here are, in this regard, irrelevant since they fall outside of community consensus. Editors who feel strongly should direct their attention to the main debates centring around policy where that consensus is determined.
Sorry for the bolding and repetition, but it is important that editors who feel strongly about this issue ensure they participate in fora where their views can be considered. This is not such a forum and as the current discussion is unfolding, the individual episode pages will be merged. Eusebeus 23:30, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
I know blogs are generally not acceptable or reliable sources, but Elgar works for an HR firm and provides background information on her claims. Notthegoatseguy 15:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
I notice that every debate about this topic usually has nay sayers that believe that either no one listens or that the information is useful. And the opposite side tends to yell "REAL WORLD INFORMATION, BLARGH!" and not much else. I can't help but think that this will soon become the bureaucratic form of WP:ILIKEIT. Nevertheless, there are many other places for in-depth information with less stringent regulations. Pacific Coast Highway { Trick • or treat!} 02:22, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm a huge fan of The Office but also agree that episode guides are non-encyclopedic and do not fit the Wikipedia guidelines. Selected aspects of a show may be encyclopedic when they become part of the cultural language (e.g. "Soup Nazi") but episode guides aren't part of the cultural language. The Office has
Dunderpedia, just as other popular shows have their own sites for episode guides and other non-encyclopedic fan material (
The Simpsons,
Battlestar Galactica,
Babylon 5). So far, the arguments against merging have been of the form "But I like it this way." Wikipedia is not "a list of everything people like." There are guidelines for inclusion, and those guidelines determine what goes in and what stays out. If you don't like the guidelines, then work to change the Wikipedia guidelines or move to Dunderpedia which has laxer guidelines. "But it cramps my style" is not a valid argument for inclusion. --
Raymondc0 10:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I would side with merging individual episode articles by season. Each episode doesn't need more than two well-written paragraphs to describe its plot (more for 30-50 minute episodes than the standard 22, of course), and Wikipedia's guidelines pretty clearly state that episodes should be individually notable to merit their own article. As for the trivia currently in the article pages, such is discouraged by Wikipedia guidelines. -
Chardish 23:30, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Per the discussion here, I will redirect to the episode articles to the main LOE page soon. Interested editors may wish to transwiki the information to a wikia, as discussed in WP:FICT. Eusebeus ( talk) 16:02, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
It should be easy to write original summaries, so that this page violates copyright less. – thedemonhog talk • edits • box 05:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
When clicking the link for the take your daughter to work day episode, it links to something else, could someone please fix this so it links to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Take_Your_Daughter_to_Work_Day_%28The_Office_episode%29
thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.80.254.25 ( talk) 12:27, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
This page 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. |