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 25 | ← | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | Archive 31 | → | Archive 35 |
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:RuPaul's Drag Race is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:RuPaul's Drag Race until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 02:50, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Twist of Fate (2016 TV series) is a dub of Kumkum Bhagya. Do we typically create articles on dubs? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 15:12, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Hey Alex 21 – please show me exactly where WP:TVCAST justifies an edit like this? Hmmmm?!
We've been over this already: guest cast appearances that are unsourced (and frankly, even if they are, IMO...) must include the title of the episode that the guest cast appeared in, as per WP:V, because the only thing that verifies their appearance on a TV series is the guest cast credit in the episode itself, as per WP:PRIMARY. Without the episode title, this can't be easily verified (think of a series like L&O:SVU, where you'd have to search through 400+ episodes to find a guest credit!!).
This kind of nonsense is exactly why I generally think 'Guest cast' sections are a bad idea – because too many editors have gotten into their heads that it's "OK" to list guest cast with no other information. If the title of the episode a guest cast appeared in is not listed (certainly if there's no other sourcing), then the appearance is not verifiable, is basically WP:OR, and it should be removed. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 13:00, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
The cast listing should not contain an episode count, e.g. (6 episodes) or (episodes 1–6), to indicate the number of episodes in which the actor or character appeared.The attempt to use the episode title instead of a count is just a loophole that is trying to be exploited. WP:V states nothing about guest cast, but if it does need to be cited, then do so properly and use the correct cite template. (Which I already said to do.)
This guideline is a part of the English Wikipedia's Manual of Style. It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply. Any substantive edit to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page.Bold emphasis mine. And there it makes sense to list the episode titles in which they appear; it is not a loophole, but rather following WP:VERIFY, which is a policy. The other option would be to have the guest stars listed in the summaries, so we can have something to go off of for each episode, but of course that won't be happening there. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 15:27, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
I don't know how or why we got into the habit of listing every guest (that we deem important simply because of who they are).We shouldn't list every single non-recurring guest star. We of course list all main cast, followed by recurring cast—those with five or more appearances—followed by notable guest stars. Notable guest stars include those who receive a special guest star credit and then anyone else people can agree is notable. The latter would include main cast from one series guest starring on another on the same network group of networks. For example, if Meg Donnelly from American Housewife guest stars on an episode of Single Parents, that makes her notable since both are ABC sitcoms. If Milo Manheim guest stars on an episode of Single Parents, he is also notable since he is main cast Disney Channel's Zombies, and ABC is part of Disney. Add: By doing that, we limit it so we're not listing every single non-recurring guest star. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 19:07, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
"All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable... any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material."That's what we're talking about here – no secondary source and no episode title = "unverfiable". If editors don't like an "in-text" episode cite, then they are free to do what Alex did at The Rookie and make them inline cites. Now, while I don't think inline citation style is "necessary", one way or the other all guest cast must be sourced to something – either a secondary media coverage source, a press release on the episode, or the episode title itself (which cites the episode's credits and cast list, as per WP:PRIMARY). There are no other options on this: it's either source 'Guest' cast (somehow), or they can (and should) be removed. P.S. To be clear, the same applies to actor WP:FILMOGRAPHY sections – a Filmography 'Note' that says "1 episode" doesn't cut it; it's needs to be "Episode: "The Hawke" for the same verifiability purposes; that's also why in Filmography tables, "Recurring role" isn't enough – it needs to be "Recurring role (seasons 1–2)" for similar reasons. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 15:11, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I completely disagree. I'm not saying you have to 100% complete the information in the citation episode template, but you need more than just a title. Could you eventually find what you're looking for. Yes, I'm sure. But you shouldn't have to go sleuthing around just to verify some information. Again, that's not what PRIMARY SOURCE says. PRIMARY just describes what constitutes a primary source, so please stop pointing to that page like it defines how to cite a primary source. I would question the notion that simply putting an episode title next to the character would stand up to any review here. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 18:08, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
This page documents an English Wikipedia content guideline. It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply.In other words, guidelines aren't policies or top-down rules that are absolute and must be followed to the letter. Also, the specific section reads:
Citations for films, TV episodes, or video recordings typically include. Keyword here being typically, meaning not required, but information you may see included. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 21:06, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
I was going to post this at WP:TVS, but that WikiProject is listed as semi-active; so, I figured I'd ask about it here. Sat.1#Programmes has a kind of WP:TVGUIDE feel to it, at least in my opinion. It seems to be trying to list every show the network ever ran. Most of the entries don't seem to have Wikipedia articles written about them (though perhaps they may have German Wikipedia articles written about them and could possiblly have English articles written about them as well) which might mean there's no real need to mention them. Moreover, the whole program section is bascically one big embedded list when it might be better to trim and rewrite as WP:PROSE instead. Just for rough comparison purposes, PBS#Programming and List of programs broadcast by PBS might be one possible way around something such as this. There's also the MOS:HEAD issue of a citation being used in the section heading, but this is relatively minor cleanup and can be taken care of once the other issues are resolved. Anyway, just wondering if a split might be justified for "Programmes" section. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 00:41, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Am I missing something or are these articles duplicates of one another? Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventures and Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventures (1990 TV series). Pinging @ Sakura Cartelet: who reverted the redirect. -- Gonnym ( talk) 08:41, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Game of Thrones episodes#Unnecessary hiding of episodes. -- Wikipedical ( talk) 17:17, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
The article Discovery Channel Mexico has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Tagged as being unreferenced since 2008 and for notability/context since 2017. Article is nothing more than a single sentence and a navigation box. No evidence that this meets WP:GNG or WP:ORG; so, if deletion is not appropriate, then a redirect to another article may be.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion. --
Marchjuly (
talk) 14:14, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
There is a request for comment on the reliability of TRT World on the reliable sources noticeboard. If you're interested, please participate at WP:RSN § RfC: TRT World. — Newslinger talk 08:03, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
An RfC has been opened at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television)#RFC: What disambiguation should shows from the United States and United Kingdom use?. Additional participation is welcomed. -- Netoholic @ 18:50, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
At Writers Guild of America Award for Television: Episodic Drama, the infobox says that the award is held by a writer for a series. However, I believe a writer wins for an episode. The confusion extends to the templates ({{ WritersGuildofAmericaEpisodicDramaScreenplay 1980s}}, {{ WritersGuildofAmericaEpisodicDramaScreenplay 1990s}}, {{ WritersGuildofAmericaEpisodicDramaScreenplay 2000s}}, and {{ WritersGuildofAmericaEpisodicDramaScreenplay 2010s}}) that have been the subject of great warring. TVBuff90 does not think the templates should refer to a winning writer and there is an IP 98.234.123.100 that has been warring with him on this issue. Today, Rockstone35 removed writers from the templates in an attempt to stop disruptive behavior, which I don't think was really accurate. Do writers win for an episode and if so do winning writers belong on the templates?- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:09, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography#MOS:HYPOCORISM regaring the applicability of MOS:HYPOCORISM as the rsult of this edit where "Jackie" (the character's on-screen name) was restored after it had been removed. Since this has the potential to affect many character articles it's a discussion in which this project should participate. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 00:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.
There is a discussion on the reliability of Turner Classic Movies (TCM) and the TCM Movie Database (TCMdb) on the reliable sources noticeboard. If you're interested, please participate at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § How would guys consider TCM (Turner Classic Movies) especially their TCMDb section for sources and citations. — Newslinger talk 07:52, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
There needs to be something done about this Gay agenda pushing regarding Talk:Lance (Voltron) and Talk:Keith (Voltron). There are no third person sources to support it something needs to be done. Dwanyewest ( talk) 12:14, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
The recent deletion of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Numkena, who was the 2nd-billed cast regular of the 26-episode CBS series Brave Eagle may elicit comments as to the general nature of such deletions and a specific question regarding a possible recreation of his entry. If there are BLP concerns, the lead sentence may be reduced to, "XXXXXX was an American actor", with a list of credits and a couple of inline cites to general references such as Tim Brooks/Earle Marsh, Alex McNeil or Vincent Terrace, plus a couple of "External links" to IMDb, TVGuide, etc until someone expands it. — Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 20:40, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
It seems to be my belief that most of the pages for individual episodes of The Vampire Diaries do not meet notability or source guidelines. They are almost completely plot summaries with a song list and some reviews. Any opinions from someone who has dealt with this before? I would suggest redirecting them into the season pages. DLManiac ( talk) 22:46, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Love, Death & Robots#Flag icons for studio. — YoungForever (talk) 16:23, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
There is an RM discussion on a page that may be of interest to this WikiProject:
Thanks for your input. WanderingWanda (they/them) ( t/ c) 21:48, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
In case anyone has missed it, various hand-curated television portals are currently listed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion. They include:
probably among others, it is getting hard to keep track. Most of these are in need of maintainers, if anyone is interested. Espresso Addict ( talk) 00:54, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Battlestar Galactica is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Battlestar Galactica until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 06:47, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:The X-Files is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:The X-Files until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 06:58, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Would someone from this WikiProject mind taking a look at InterswitchSPAK and assessing it? It went through AfC so it probably meets WP:TVSHOW, but this edit here might indicate some COI or even undisclosed paid editing is taking place. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 14:25, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 April 23#Template:Big Brother sidebar . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 21:23, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
I feel sure that editors have used [[theatrical adaptation]] and [[TV adaptation]] in the parallel senses of
literary adaptation for the stage and for the TV screen. In fact, however, TV/television adaptation are two redirects to adaptation of television material for the cinema, or TV-to-film.
Moments ago I posted a longer notice of the problem at
Talk:Literary adaptation#Theatrical adaptation, TV adaptation.
(I post this short one also at
WP:LIT,
WP:CHILDLIT). --
P64 (
talk) 22:48, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
I have recently become concerned about the use of screenshots in {{
Infobox Television episode}}, or similar templates such as {{
Infobox Doctor Who episode}}. This is because nearly all of these screenshots used a non-free, and I believe that in most cases the images fail
WP:NFCC, particularly
WP:NFCC#8 (Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.
), a policy with legal considerations. Omitting many of these screenshots would not, I think, inhibit anyone's understanding of the infomation conveyed on the article. I understand there are series, such as
The Simpsons, who have reduced the use of these images, while other series, such as
Game of Thrones use screenshots on the vast majority of their episode articles. So I'm here to try to start a discussions about whether the use of these images is O.K. from a legal perspective and whether there is a good purpose to these images for them to stay. --
Ted
Edwards 21:25, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Horus from Thai Wikipedia. Recently there was a dispute in Thai Wikipedia whether inclusion of user-compiled data in television-related articles is allowed in Thai Wikipedia. The user involved claimed that English Wikipedia allowed such data, and therefore was confused whether the practice is not equally enforced in different Wikipedia. I, therefore, raised a question here: "Is inclusion of user-compiled data allowed in English Wikipedia (in television article context)?"
The pages in question are I Can See Your Voice Thailand, I Can See Your Voice Thailand (season 1), I Can See Your Voice Thailand (season 2), I Can See Your Voice Thailand (season 3) -- Horus ( talk) 04:43, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
I would like to make a proposal in merging two pages together. This would mean merging the Endemol wiki page into the Endemol Shine Group wiki page. These are the pages I am referring to.
/info/en/?search=Endemol_Shine_Group
The reason doing a merger proposal for these two pages makes logical sense because Endemol merged with Shine Group in 2015. You can already see on the description for Endemol Shine Group that it has incorporated this information, Endemol is incorporate in the History part of the Endemol Shine Group.
I think this is quite important because Endemol Shine make very popular shows globally such as Peaky Blinders and Black Mirror. However, if you were to type Endemol Shine into google, you see that Endemol comes up first. I think this is so confusing to people who are trying to understand the diference between endemol and endemol shine group. When I type it into google endemol is the first thing that seems to come up.
For this reason , I think we should merge the two so that it reflects the merger. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ojmarson ( talk • contribs) 16:27, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi... can I get some more eyes on Music of Stranger Things, specifically on the recent split of material from that page to Stranger Things (soundtrack) and Stranger Things 2 (soundtrack)? — Joeyconnick ( talk) 07:17, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
Please see the below:
Thanks. -- wooden superman 15:07, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello, |
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Beyond the Wall (Game of Thrones) that may be helped by your participation. Thank you for reading! Paine Ellsworth, ed. put'r there 15:33, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
A discussion related to this project has begun here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#Creating a new genre. Please feel free to add your thoughts there. MarnetteD| Talk 14:20, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Buffy the Vampire Slayer is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Buffy the Vampire Slayer (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 10:08, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I posted this question on a Talk page over a month ago, without any reply, but perhaps I put it in the wrong place. Are you by any chance able to provide more information?
/info/en/?search=User_talk:Unreal7#After_Dark_(TV_series)?
Just trying to find out what the rules on this are. Many thanks for any help. AnOpenMedium ( talk) 17:12, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
For some series the BBC will release the whole series as a box set on iPlayer on the same day that the first episode is aired (the iPlayer views count towards TV ratings even when viewed weeks before the "Air Date"), it will then go on to show the other episodes on a weekly schedule. So what date should go in the "Air Date" field of the Episode List template? The date that the individual episode is actually broadcast or the date that the box set was released? I can see merits for both sides, perhaps we need a new field in the template to handle this situation (e.g. Available Date / First Broadcast Date). I think both dates are valid but I'm wondering what others think. Any opinions? - X201 ( talk) 11:18, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi all. There is a discussion taking place on the Game of Thrones talk page regarding the removal of the Infobox images on every episode's article. Some much needed consensus is needed on this change. Please join in! Thanks!-- Templeowls17 ( talk) 12:02, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
There is a request for comment regarding whether IMDb should be added to User:XLinkBot/RevertReferencesList, which tells XLinkBot to automatically revert citations of IMDb by unregistered users and accounts under 7 days old, subject to additional limitations. If you're interested, please participate at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § RfC: IMDb. — Newslinger talk 18:19, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
This is just an interesting titbit for anyone that didn't know about it. If you're trying to hide a episode list template that already has a hidden comment, use the {{
Void}} template like {{
^|Episode list}}
, instead of <!--Episode list-->
. Using {{
^|Episode list}}
allows you to keep the hidden note without needing to do any weird things with the note like --><!--Note--><!--
. I've added an example below (edit to see it).
Just thought it might be helpful. -- / Alex/ 21 11:02, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Just stumbled upon Be A Star (UK TV series) on Wikidata, and to my surprise couldn't find it in any film/tv database (IMDb, thetvdb.com, TMDb, etc.). And when searching for a show with this title and these judges, Google and DuckDuckGo come up empty except Wikipedia mirrors/copies. You'd think that a recent show with such big names involved would have left some traces on the internet. I'm not very familiar with the English Wikipedia's procedures for cases like this, so maybe a regular could check it out. And if it's indeed a hoax, the other edits of the user who created it, Special:Contributions/ADunne05, probably should be checked, too. Regards, -- Kam Solusar ( talk)
Listed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Be A Star (UK TV series) - X201 ( talk) 14:07, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Now added to Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia in the 1-3 years section. - X201 ( talk) 13:25, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
There is a discussion on the reliability of Screen Rant on the reliable sources noticeboard. If you're interested, please participate at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § Screen Rant. — Newslinger talk 07:03, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
I've recently reverted the addition of the Game of Thrones season (and series) finale. THe episode premiered tonight to (presumably) millions of watchers. That said, I think its reasonable to assume that millions and millions more have not seen the episode as of yet.
I've been inactive on WikiEn for almost a year, and am unsure of my procedural footing regarding this revert. Doesn't it infringe on the studio/station's ability to make money if we don't wait a reasonable amount of time before posting the plot of the episode? I remember us doing precisely this with other media, both tv and film.
Some guidance, please. - Jack Sebastian ( talk) 03:37, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
this is about the infringement of the makers' ability to make money from their work. Otherwise, it's nothing but a made up statement. There is nothing preventing us from writing an episode summary after an episode airs for any series. It could be Game of Thrones or PAW Patrol. Also, sites like Amazon and iTunes have new episodes available the day after they air at 12:00 AM. So if a new episode airs at 9:00 PM, and that new episode is released at 12:00 AM the next day, that's only a wait of three hours. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 04:20, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
(
edit conflict) Wait. Do...do you - hey, tell me you understand that the Wiki-En isn't North America specific, right? That means this wiki is read well beyond our borders, from Seattle to Surabaya (where, as I've pointed out, the ep has not aired). We don't publish just for the North American readers. I'm getting the vibe that you don't think that, and its pretty effing important that you get on board with that, pronto.
This isn't about spoilers, Amaury; in 24 hours, my concerns evaporate. That will be the time when it can be reasonably expected that the general public (read: the world) has access to the content being offered on pay services. What we are doing is akin to video piracy. And those "contractual reasons" you noted? They keep folk from getting sued by the copyright holders. It allows the networks to enjoy the fruit of their labors.
Why are you in such a hurry? This isn't a race. We aren't in a hurry. We aren't a newspaper of a social media site. -
Jack Sebastian (
talk) 05:13, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
We need opinions on the following matters: Talk:The Iron Throne (Game of Thrones)#Let's try to keep this article balanced and Talk:The Iron Throne (Game of Thrones)#False balance. A permalink for it is here. In other words, we need opinions on assessing and presenting the critical consensus and/or appropriate weight per WP:Due. Rotten Tomatoes is part of the discussion. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 10:06, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Futurama is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Futurama (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 23:15, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
I just encountered an issue that prevented me from transcluding data from a season article to another page. After posting on
WP:VPT, the issue was found that using the <onlyinclude>
tags around the episode list prevent any other possible transclusions. Instead of those tags, an option that works and does not prevent other transclusions is to use <section begin=Episodes />
and <section end=Episodes />
(the "Episodes" text can be anything) instead of the onlyinclude tags, and {{#section:page name|Episodes}}
on the list of episodes page. --
Gonnym (
talk) 11:45, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello. You are invited to participate in two related RfCs: Talk:5G#RfC:Russian disinformation and Talk:RT (TV network)#RfC:Propaganda. R2 ( bleep) 18:29, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
During a dispute over my removal of cast years in the infobox, per infobox instructions, and editor made the following statement: it makes ZERO SENSE to ban years ONLY on the hosts entry I edited when several other entries in the SAME infobox (directors, producers, production companies, networks, video format) have them.
[2] This does seem a valid question. Should we be excluding years for all cast and crew listed in the infobox and not just the cast that we see and/or hear? --
AussieLegend (
✉) 16:16, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television#Boldfaced season number in the lead sentence of season articles. Radiphus ( talk) 05:36, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
The horizontal rule has been used for sometime now to combine episodes, for example episode 11/2 of Terra Nova (TV series). Last night an IP changed the code to combine the episodes, [3] which is an issue that even went to RfC so I reverted. This resulted in the IP making this edit stating "In that case, fix massive accessibility issue and tag unruly summary" in his edit summary. He hasn't made clear what the issue is but it seems to be use of the horizontal rule. However, I can find nothing in MOS:ACCESS about horizontal rules so my question is, should we be using horizontal rules or not? If so, then this affects many more than this article and needs to be addressed. I have opened a related discussion at WT:ACCESS#Use of the horizontal rule. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 06:52, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
rowspan="2"
to produce the 2 lines but just a visual separator, it is still places readers using screen readers at a disadvantage as it reads for them unwanted information - if a reader wanted to know who wrote the 2nd episode, it readers "Story by : Kelly Marcel & Craig Silverstein Teleplay by : Craig Silverstein & Kelly Marcel and Brannon Braga & David Fury", before finally reaching the actual information. There just is no reason for this. --
Gonnym (
talk) 07:30, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
1<hr>2
is somehow "better" than 1–2
for the episode numbering... I guess what I'm saying is that I see use of the horizontal rule even in a number of cases where it doesn't really "need" to be used, or where "splitting" episodes #1 and #2 into separate rows would be the better solution. --
IJBall (
contribs •
talk) 15:07, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
<hr />
tag, and can now be done through the numbered parameters, such as |DirectedBy_1=
, |DirectedBy_2=
, etc. -- /
Alex/
21 01:23, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Avoid using <br>
tags in adjacent cells to emulate a visual row that isn't reflected in the HTML table structure. This is a problem for users of screen readers which read tables cell by cell, HTML row by HTML row, not visual row by visual row.
This applies to <hr>
as well, given the identical nature as a block element. That's why the numbered parameters were implemented, and are already documented at
Template:Episode list."1a", "1b" numbering is needed in cases where the writers and/or directors are different between the two episodes/segments, so that the credits are listed with their correct episode. -- /
Alex/
21 11:32, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Looks like that is a small enough number to fix. Just needs agreement and then it can be fixed. - X201 ( talk) 07:26, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi all, I'm proposing a merge: List of Tamil soap operas currently airing → List of Tamil soap operas. Discussion can be found Talk:List of Tamil soap operas#Proposed merge with List of Tamil soap operas currently airing. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:04, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
I've taken a look at some talk show "season" articles, and there seems to be a systmatic issue with all of them. Here are the 2018 articles (used these since 2019 is only half-way done and these should be in better condition): Conan, James Corden, Jimmy Fallon, Seth Meyers and Stephen Colbert. As you can see, all these articles are just the episode tables, without any other information, with one not even having one source add to it (and most older talk show lists are similar with no sources). I'm sure a year ("season") of production can be notable, with special events and guests, controversies and other stuff to add to the production and of course critical reception, ratings, awards, etc. However, these articles don't have these. In their current form these should be merged into the main List of series episodes article. I'd appreciate other input on this. -- Gonnym ( talk) 19:48, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Big Brother Canada#Requested move 7 June 2019 . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 02:39, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Just an FYI, I've noticed "Luke Bickerton" being added to TV articles lately. e.g. 1 2 It's not always the same editor and others have been fixed by other editors. It's not always obvious that it's vandalism. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 11:38, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
The FAC for Soultaker has been going on for over a month and I'm hoping that it can get some more eyes on it before it closes. GamerPro64 22:45, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Recently, I came across that Charmed (2018 TV series) have been split into a season page and an individual episode pages for all 22 episodes. Per Wikipedia:Article splitting (television), it seems to be WP:TOOSOON, as WP:SPLIT, WP:SUMMARY, WP:SPINOUT, WP:LENGTH apply to the season page and individual episode pages. Can editors who are familiar with television article splitting give an input on this? — YoungForever (talk) 22:14, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Experienced TV editors: please weigh in on a discussion here about List of Twin Peaks episodes. Specifically, the discussion is about whether to remove ratings graphs added using the template Template:Television ratings graph, which has been designed for this purpose. I tried to open the discussion and ping interested users to no avail. One user, who refused to respond or meaningfully participate in the discussion, has continued reverting my edits to reinstate the graphs. All viewpoints welcome. Thank you — BLZ · talk 21:29, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Where are this projects' instructions on how to add ratings to an article? There's a brief mention of ratings in MOS:TVRECEPTION, but no actual guidelines on how it should be done. I ask because it appears that every editor is free to think that their way is the only right way to do it and it's starting to feel like I'm wasting my time contributing. I've been reverted for adding 7 day figures, and for adding 28 day figures, questioned for not adding 7 day figures, for combining references that point to the same page, for putting a reference in a column header (where the template documentation tells you to put it), I've been reverted, accused of disruptive editing and told to "stop dicking around with the ratings". Where in this project's MoS are the instructions on the accepted way to add ratings? - X201 ( talk) 07:41, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
There's a discussion regarding a potential WP:MOS on all fictional characters. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Manual of Style for fictional characters?. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 22:50, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Can you join to the discussion about Game of Thrones' season 8 critical reception summary so that it can reach a consensus? Sebastian James what's the T? 19:11, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Sandra_Oh#Canadian-American?. Joeyconnick ( talk) 20:49, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
I once again brought up the listings for season four of Family Matters not being correct on the episode list talk page. Some input is needed before I make such a correction. Mr. C.C. Hey yo! I didn't do it! 03:46, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Big Brother 21 (American season)#Day 1 Eviction. TheDoctorWho (talk) 05:18, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
I thought this BuzzFeedarticle from today might make some of you feel better about spoilers, LOL: Davis, Adam (June 27, 2019). "If You Read Wikipedia Summaries Instead of Watching Movies or TV Shows, You're Not Alone". BuzzFeed. — TAnthony Talk 01:10, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Can someone explain the rationale behind this directive, noted in some but not all the relevant fields, in Template:Infobox television? Particularly in the case of Jeopardy!, removing the year/season information greatly reduces the meaningfulness of the information presented without substantially improving the aesthetic of the presentation. It just makes it seem like the show had multiple hosts/producers/directors/announces etc. simultaneously, when a simple inclusion of year/season eliminates any such confusion and keeps things clean. Is not this rule more of a "foolish consistency" hobgoblin? (For reference, here is the first diff that introduced this language, although initially it was only for "starring".) Robert K S ( talk) 19:54, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
|first_aired=
is being used improperly. We should only be listing one first_aired
date, not every date as Jeopardy does. It includes the original run, weekly syndication that overlaps the original run, another run on the same channel (that appears to be a continuation of the first run) and a "daily syndication" date range. If additional dates need to be discussed they should be discussed in the prose. I note that
Robert K S has been edit-warring with other editors about this, rather than engaging on the talk page. --
AussieLegend (
✉) 11:05, 28 June 2019 (UTC)"Editors should attempt to follow guidelines, though they are best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply."The question is whether occasional exceptions do apply, and if so where. That's why I suggested the discussion should take place at the Talk page of the actual article of interest to gauge if there's consensus support for this being considered an "exception". However, I agree with AussieLegend that edit warring in this case is absolutely not justified, especially not without a Talk page discussion on the topic first. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 16:23, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
meta-discussion involving
personal attacks collapsed
|
---|
Leaving aside that I'm not sure why I'm the one accused of edit warring (notorious edit warrers/wikilawyers TPH and AldezD reverted my revert without discussion, and while misrepresenting even what the guideline said), "don't include dates" isn't as cut-and-dried of a rule for some shows as for others. Omitting dates on an article like Jeopardy! leaves the instant misimpression that there are multiple simultaneous hosts/announcers, or even that long-dead individuals are still involved with the show. I can see the want not to include dates/seasons when the persons get too numerous, as this makes the infobox too large, and would support a revised guideline that said as much. E.g., more than four hosts/announcers/etc, no dates. If accessibility is an issue, the small tags can be removed; the aesthetic benefit they provide is probably minimal. (But I think accessibility is a pretext here. Wikipedia has small text everywhere, particularly in infoboxes.) Robert K S ( talk) 17:22, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
|
See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#Todd (now Emily) VanDerWerff having come out as transgender. A permalink for it is here. As some or all here may know, VanDerWerff is commonly used as a source for the critical reception section in television show articles. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 17:19, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
It seems wrong that the British season-pages for Category:Ex_on_the_Beach don't have "British" in the disambiguation, while the article on the show as a whole is at Ex on the Beach (British TV series). I'm not sure which of these is incorrect (or whether it should be "UK" versus "British"). Can somebody propose the correct move to make this consistent? power~enwiki ( π, ν) 17:16, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
there ist the wrong link for Marc Benjamin (Dutch DJ c Benjamin Latupapua instead of Swiss actor Marc Benjamin Stähelin) in the English and Dutch version of this page. I tried to change it but I'm not sure it has worked... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.25.6.78 ( talk) 21:02, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
For pretty much any series, we see the writer(s) listed first followed by the director(s); as such, I'm wondering if we should follow that order here as well and swap things in the template. If this change were to go through, we wouldn't even need to go through and update articles, we would just update the template. The code in the articles would show directed by -> written by, but the display would show written by -> directed by. I can confirm this as I tried playing around with things a while ago by placing the "director" and "DirectedBy" parameters after the "writer" and "WrittenBy" parameters, and the output still showed directed by -> written by. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 18:19, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Similarly, I see that for the teleplay stuff, it's shown as teleplay by -> story by, so perhaps Template:StoryTeleplay should be Template:TeleplayStory, with teleplay being on the top and story being on the bottom. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 20:54, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Template updated. -- / Alex/ 21 11:18, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Big Brother 21 (American season)#Canadian ratings . Brojam ( talk) 04:34, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:The WB is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:The WB until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Northamerica1000 ( talk • contribs) 08:43, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Constantine (TV series)#Unproduced episode and the episode table. More opinions needed here – Issue is: Should unproduced episodes be included in the episodes table? -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 02:04, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Blood & Treasure#Two-hour pilot episode counts ONE episode. More opinions needed here – it's the perennial issue: when a pilot is broadcast as a two-hour pilot, does it count as one episode in the episode table, or two? IOW, do we follow sources, or the production codes? -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 02:04, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Dynasty (2017 TV series)#About Michael Michele as Dominique Deveraux promoted to be a series regular . — YoungForever (talk) 16:44, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Is the "No. in season" column always required in an episode list? I'm thinking specifically of a TV show such as the American version of Celebrity Big Brother, for which the episodes are called Episode 1, Episode 2, etc. Our episodes list has a "No. in season" column, which seems completely redundant to me, given the titles of the individual episodes. The column could easily be removed without any loss of information to our readers. Any thoughts? Thanks, A Thousand Doors ( talk | contribs) 01:21, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
I'm a little confused by this article -
Total Drama All-Stars and Pahkitew Island (and probably the others of the series as well). As far as I can tell it's a fake animated reality series TV series about an animated series about a fake reality series (edit: fixed description), yet it uses all those (horrible) reality tables in the article and since (I'm assuming) the page was too large, split the actual relevent information, the episode list, to a different article
List of Total Drama All-Stars and Pahkitew Island episodes. Is this really how these articles should be? --
Gonnym (
talk) 10:01, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Start up studio staffed by Conan refugees. Sources exist and can be improved. WP:NEXIST, and WP:Notability questions. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 13:04, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Pennyworth (TV series)#About Epix Schedule of Episode Titles . — YoungForever (talk) 14:55, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
Do any of you edit Big Brother/Bigg Boss-related articles? Bigg Boss Tamil 3 could probably use some policing. Something like 10-15% of the page is written in bold face, and I'm not exactly clear on what content is pertinent or what content is just fancruft. Especially note the expandable table under Weekly summary. Any extra eyes would be appreciated. I semi-protected the article after a couple of anons were taking ownership of it, and as soon as I did, they finally logged into their user accounts. SMH... Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 14:52, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Cloak & Dagger (TV series)#Split the character section . This has been going since April 2019. — YoungForever (talk) 16:49, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi all, any thoughts on how to best deal with the wall of names in the infobox at Nach Baliye? I deleted them on the basis that they were asinine but anon seems to disagree. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 15:16, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Arrow (TV series)#Transclusions. -- / Alex/ 21 09:03, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:The Boys (2019 TV series)#Shaun Benson as Ezekiel. — YoungForever (talk) 14:33, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
A lot of users/ IPs are adding Netflix links as external links Roma Daredevil calling it the official page like here. So is it fine too add Netflix links for original programming as they might not be according to external links policy ( WP:ELNO). Sid95Q ( talk) 15:35, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
that the Netflix links are the official websites for Netflix originals.And if there is a production website for the Netflix original series, then it's only a production website. — YoungForever (talk) 19:50, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
granting the site an exception (as an "official" site") to do just that-- to be added to every articleNot per WP:ELMINOFFICIAL. Netflix should be an insertion of last resort. -- Izno ( talk) 14:06, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Dose anyone want to help with Draft:List of animated shows by episode count Fanoflionking 18:33, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Mindhunter (TV series)#Dennis Rader. More opinions are needed here to reach a consensus. — YoungForever (talk) 15:12, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
I am working on the List of Money Heist episodes list. The show's original run in Spain had 15 episodes, but Netflix re-cut the episodes into 22 for international distribution (which affects most en-wiki readers). Are there shows with similar "problems" (incl. maybe animes)? I'd like to learn how their episode lists handled the situation. – sgeureka t• c 12:17, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Manifest (TV series)#About the Guest section. — YoungForever (talk) 17:37, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi! It's not exactly in this area, but a YouTube paid series Escape the Night has some issues with copyvio and WP:FANCRUFT. Any help in cleaning up the issues would be appreciated. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 19:30, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
I'm not sure that Best Ever Trivia Show meets the notability guidelines. The show's been on the air for three months and doesn't even have an IMDb page. The only sources I've found so far are press releases and non-notable fan blogs. Should it go to AFD? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 04:20, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Is dark comedy a TV genre suitable for the |genre=
parameter of the infobox?
Invader Zim's genres are well-sourced, but it seems odd to describe it that way and I don't find it listed at
List of genres#Film and television formats and genres. I note that
M*A*S*H (TV series) is also indicated as a dark comedy. Thanks,
Cyphoidbomb (
talk) 21:54, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
For my own edification, is there any way to add a white border around a reference if we're pasting it atop a dark background? Note List of Jacob Two-Two (TV series) episodes#Season 1 (2003). I know the alternative is to change the arbitrary color scheme, but I still think I should know if there is a way to do this. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 14:40, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
Editors are still removing cast from the infobox at Loose Women. There has also been a request to restore the ridiculous table of which presenter sat in which chair on a particular night that I mentioned in this discussion. Some extra eyes on this article would therefore be appreciated. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 10:57, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
The user Bankster ( talk · contribs) has been making edits to various articles on specialty television channels in an effort to " standardize" certain terms.
However, there has been disregard for regional use of specific terms to describe such services, particularly the editor's specific insistence on using the term " pay television" to refer to any channel not free-to-air. "Pay television" typically refers to things like HBO, standalone premium services not in bundles. In the U.S., there isn't a clear term, and "cable channel" is used most often since that was the original form of multichannel television. In Canada, specialty channel is not only a common term, but also has specific legal implications, since licenses are required from our regulator. At the same time, I was wanting to shift the Canadian specialty television articles to refer to them all as "specialty television" (or pay television where applicable) channels as opposed to the specific discretionary service category, as the former is more informative because pretty much every channel falls within "discretionary services" now.
But anyway, Bankster has often undone reversions to his changes with no explanation, and has made relatively few attempts to discuss their changes with other editors. There is clearly consensus against his changes, as seen by me and others. I think any mass changes in terms, especially ones that use misnomers, should be discussed first. ViperSnake151 Talk 20:55, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
So, we currently have Category:American anthology television series for anthology series, but would it be worth splitting this category into two for season- and episodic-anthology series? For example, Category:American anthology-season television series for series such as American Crime Story, American Horror Story and Scream, and Category:American anthology-episode television series for series such as Heartstrings, Into the Dark, Two Sentence Horror Stories and The Twilight Zone. -- / Alex/ 21 07:23, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
So I recently reverted a user's edit on The Masked Singer (American season 1), stating, "Moreso trivial information"- it was basically a table which outlines what the panelists had as their main guess for who was under a mask (before being unmasked) and whether they were correct or wrong. I could be entirely wrong in my revert, but it just seems like something more trivial that I would find on a Wikia page as opposed to being on a Wikipedia page.
The user has since added a talk page comment about it, but not sure what to respond. I've been looking through guidelines of Wikipedia and well as MOS:TV (as well as this WikiProject's talk archives), and the best I could find was WP:NOTSTATS. Now again, I'm not sure but my revert could be entirely wrong, but it does seem more trivial. Yes, as the user has pointed out, "Isn't the whole basis of this show about guessing who the masked singers are? Half of the minutes are dedicated to the clues and the panelists trying to interpret them."- but I would think that the clues given for each masked singer can be interpreted however anyone wants to interpret it. Just to give some more context, here is an example of a masked singer reveal with the panelists' final guesses as to who it is.
WP:NPOVFAQ and WP:NPOV might (?) come into play in this too, but I really don't know now. I'm struggling between it being encyclopedic information and trivial information better suited for a Wikia currently. Thanks. Magitroopa ( talk) 03:06, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Animation#Lots_of_unsourced,_non-notable_articles. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 20:58, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
I would appreciate some comments at this discussion, whatever your opinion may be. 4meter4 ( talk) 15:12, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
This is just an FYI for anyone involved in the season articles for Dynasty (2017 TV series). All three have been moved without discussion after an editor who should know better submitted a request at WP:RM/TR claiming that the moves were uncontroversial. [14] This resulted in a mess at at the LoE page and all 3 season articles that TAnthony was fortunately quick to fix. One reason why I felt it necessary to mention this here is that the original season article pages are now redirects to a disambiguation page that does not mention the season articles at all, so it's a bit of a dead end for most readers. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 03:46, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
Not sure if this is the project to ask, but can't think of one better. Article is a retired physicist who appeared as a main guest in multiple episodes of a PBS documentary interview series, over the years. Added a table of appearances at the end of the article, was deleted as "Way too much". Thought such tables were pretty standard -- not for documentary appearances? Hyperbolick ( talk) 16:24, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
A bot was instructed to change all "Category:Screenplays by..." to "Category:Films with screenplays by..." Unfortunately some of these were TV episodes or series. I don't know that anyone has actually gone though and fixed this yet. Further reading: User talk:BrownHairedGirl/Archive/Archive 051#Are TV episodes considered films? @ BrownHairedGirl, Loriendrew, MER-C, Marcocapelle, Newshunter12, Woodensuperman, and JJMC89:. Probably some query to identify the TV articles would be helpful. – xeno talk 13:55, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
right use this one. 1026 hits. Previous problem was a sub cat looping around to another cat. This is a good starting point. - X201 ( talk) 15:22, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
The Terror is an anthology series which originally housed all of its related content in its main article, before it was split into season articles somewhat recently. A short discussion happened on its talk page, but nothing really came from it.
This is what the main article looked like before it was split into two season articles. You can compare that to the current version for differences. The differences? Essentially none, except the recurring cast list now only exists in the season articles. I brought this point up at the talk page, for being the sole creation for the season articles to exist: to house an exhaustive cast list similar to IMDB. Even so, there's no reason we can't also list recurring characters in the main article, this is a normal practice. Now looking at the season articles, The Terror (season 1) and The Terror: Infamy, they contain zero original content that was not already present in the main article before the merge. Simply, there's no reason why this all can't exist in one article, as the main article is nowhere near large enough that it needs to be split and the season articles are barebones and expand on nothing that didn't already exist. The only way for the season articles to exist if there was no main article, but I doubt that would ever happen. Drovethrughosts ( talk) 14:11, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Portal:Television in the United Kingdom has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Television in the United Kingdom. Certes ( talk) 11:41, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
Opinions sought at Talk:Police procedural#Merger proposal, please. Meticulo ( talk) 16:32, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
Would anyone like to take a look at the above articles? I came across the three of them today after the British series just had its first trailer released, and had to make a multitude of edits to format them properly ( [15], [16], [17]), and I've had to move all three of the articles to conform with NCTV ( [18], [19], [20]). -- / Alex/ 21 02:14, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
Good Afternoon,
I came across the American Beauty Star Wikipedia page and I wanted to get feedback on edits I thought the page could use.
I found the information page for season 1 and 2 that shows hosts, judges, and contestants on my source [1] so I wanted to add that information to the Wikipedia page. I would also add my source under the references section.
Would someone be able to advise if they think these would be acceptable edits for this Wikipedia page or if you see any issues with the edits I am proposing?
Thank you so much,
Ariverae777 ( talk) 23:07, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
References
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 25 | ← | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | Archive 31 | → | Archive 35 |
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:RuPaul's Drag Race is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:RuPaul's Drag Race until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 02:50, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Twist of Fate (2016 TV series) is a dub of Kumkum Bhagya. Do we typically create articles on dubs? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 15:12, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Hey Alex 21 – please show me exactly where WP:TVCAST justifies an edit like this? Hmmmm?!
We've been over this already: guest cast appearances that are unsourced (and frankly, even if they are, IMO...) must include the title of the episode that the guest cast appeared in, as per WP:V, because the only thing that verifies their appearance on a TV series is the guest cast credit in the episode itself, as per WP:PRIMARY. Without the episode title, this can't be easily verified (think of a series like L&O:SVU, where you'd have to search through 400+ episodes to find a guest credit!!).
This kind of nonsense is exactly why I generally think 'Guest cast' sections are a bad idea – because too many editors have gotten into their heads that it's "OK" to list guest cast with no other information. If the title of the episode a guest cast appeared in is not listed (certainly if there's no other sourcing), then the appearance is not verifiable, is basically WP:OR, and it should be removed. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 13:00, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
The cast listing should not contain an episode count, e.g. (6 episodes) or (episodes 1–6), to indicate the number of episodes in which the actor or character appeared.The attempt to use the episode title instead of a count is just a loophole that is trying to be exploited. WP:V states nothing about guest cast, but if it does need to be cited, then do so properly and use the correct cite template. (Which I already said to do.)
This guideline is a part of the English Wikipedia's Manual of Style. It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply. Any substantive edit to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page.Bold emphasis mine. And there it makes sense to list the episode titles in which they appear; it is not a loophole, but rather following WP:VERIFY, which is a policy. The other option would be to have the guest stars listed in the summaries, so we can have something to go off of for each episode, but of course that won't be happening there. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 15:27, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
I don't know how or why we got into the habit of listing every guest (that we deem important simply because of who they are).We shouldn't list every single non-recurring guest star. We of course list all main cast, followed by recurring cast—those with five or more appearances—followed by notable guest stars. Notable guest stars include those who receive a special guest star credit and then anyone else people can agree is notable. The latter would include main cast from one series guest starring on another on the same network group of networks. For example, if Meg Donnelly from American Housewife guest stars on an episode of Single Parents, that makes her notable since both are ABC sitcoms. If Milo Manheim guest stars on an episode of Single Parents, he is also notable since he is main cast Disney Channel's Zombies, and ABC is part of Disney. Add: By doing that, we limit it so we're not listing every single non-recurring guest star. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 19:07, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
"All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable... any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material."That's what we're talking about here – no secondary source and no episode title = "unverfiable". If editors don't like an "in-text" episode cite, then they are free to do what Alex did at The Rookie and make them inline cites. Now, while I don't think inline citation style is "necessary", one way or the other all guest cast must be sourced to something – either a secondary media coverage source, a press release on the episode, or the episode title itself (which cites the episode's credits and cast list, as per WP:PRIMARY). There are no other options on this: it's either source 'Guest' cast (somehow), or they can (and should) be removed. P.S. To be clear, the same applies to actor WP:FILMOGRAPHY sections – a Filmography 'Note' that says "1 episode" doesn't cut it; it's needs to be "Episode: "The Hawke" for the same verifiability purposes; that's also why in Filmography tables, "Recurring role" isn't enough – it needs to be "Recurring role (seasons 1–2)" for similar reasons. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 15:11, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I completely disagree. I'm not saying you have to 100% complete the information in the citation episode template, but you need more than just a title. Could you eventually find what you're looking for. Yes, I'm sure. But you shouldn't have to go sleuthing around just to verify some information. Again, that's not what PRIMARY SOURCE says. PRIMARY just describes what constitutes a primary source, so please stop pointing to that page like it defines how to cite a primary source. I would question the notion that simply putting an episode title next to the character would stand up to any review here. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 18:08, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
This page documents an English Wikipedia content guideline. It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply.In other words, guidelines aren't policies or top-down rules that are absolute and must be followed to the letter. Also, the specific section reads:
Citations for films, TV episodes, or video recordings typically include. Keyword here being typically, meaning not required, but information you may see included. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 21:06, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
I was going to post this at WP:TVS, but that WikiProject is listed as semi-active; so, I figured I'd ask about it here. Sat.1#Programmes has a kind of WP:TVGUIDE feel to it, at least in my opinion. It seems to be trying to list every show the network ever ran. Most of the entries don't seem to have Wikipedia articles written about them (though perhaps they may have German Wikipedia articles written about them and could possiblly have English articles written about them as well) which might mean there's no real need to mention them. Moreover, the whole program section is bascically one big embedded list when it might be better to trim and rewrite as WP:PROSE instead. Just for rough comparison purposes, PBS#Programming and List of programs broadcast by PBS might be one possible way around something such as this. There's also the MOS:HEAD issue of a citation being used in the section heading, but this is relatively minor cleanup and can be taken care of once the other issues are resolved. Anyway, just wondering if a split might be justified for "Programmes" section. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 00:41, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Am I missing something or are these articles duplicates of one another? Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventures and Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventures (1990 TV series). Pinging @ Sakura Cartelet: who reverted the redirect. -- Gonnym ( talk) 08:41, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Game of Thrones episodes#Unnecessary hiding of episodes. -- Wikipedical ( talk) 17:17, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
The article Discovery Channel Mexico has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Tagged as being unreferenced since 2008 and for notability/context since 2017. Article is nothing more than a single sentence and a navigation box. No evidence that this meets WP:GNG or WP:ORG; so, if deletion is not appropriate, then a redirect to another article may be.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion. --
Marchjuly (
talk) 14:14, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
There is a request for comment on the reliability of TRT World on the reliable sources noticeboard. If you're interested, please participate at WP:RSN § RfC: TRT World. — Newslinger talk 08:03, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
An RfC has been opened at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television)#RFC: What disambiguation should shows from the United States and United Kingdom use?. Additional participation is welcomed. -- Netoholic @ 18:50, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
At Writers Guild of America Award for Television: Episodic Drama, the infobox says that the award is held by a writer for a series. However, I believe a writer wins for an episode. The confusion extends to the templates ({{ WritersGuildofAmericaEpisodicDramaScreenplay 1980s}}, {{ WritersGuildofAmericaEpisodicDramaScreenplay 1990s}}, {{ WritersGuildofAmericaEpisodicDramaScreenplay 2000s}}, and {{ WritersGuildofAmericaEpisodicDramaScreenplay 2010s}}) that have been the subject of great warring. TVBuff90 does not think the templates should refer to a winning writer and there is an IP 98.234.123.100 that has been warring with him on this issue. Today, Rockstone35 removed writers from the templates in an attempt to stop disruptive behavior, which I don't think was really accurate. Do writers win for an episode and if so do winning writers belong on the templates?- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:09, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography#MOS:HYPOCORISM regaring the applicability of MOS:HYPOCORISM as the rsult of this edit where "Jackie" (the character's on-screen name) was restored after it had been removed. Since this has the potential to affect many character articles it's a discussion in which this project should participate. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 00:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.
There is a discussion on the reliability of Turner Classic Movies (TCM) and the TCM Movie Database (TCMdb) on the reliable sources noticeboard. If you're interested, please participate at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § How would guys consider TCM (Turner Classic Movies) especially their TCMDb section for sources and citations. — Newslinger talk 07:52, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
There needs to be something done about this Gay agenda pushing regarding Talk:Lance (Voltron) and Talk:Keith (Voltron). There are no third person sources to support it something needs to be done. Dwanyewest ( talk) 12:14, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
The recent deletion of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Numkena, who was the 2nd-billed cast regular of the 26-episode CBS series Brave Eagle may elicit comments as to the general nature of such deletions and a specific question regarding a possible recreation of his entry. If there are BLP concerns, the lead sentence may be reduced to, "XXXXXX was an American actor", with a list of credits and a couple of inline cites to general references such as Tim Brooks/Earle Marsh, Alex McNeil or Vincent Terrace, plus a couple of "External links" to IMDb, TVGuide, etc until someone expands it. — Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 20:40, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
It seems to be my belief that most of the pages for individual episodes of The Vampire Diaries do not meet notability or source guidelines. They are almost completely plot summaries with a song list and some reviews. Any opinions from someone who has dealt with this before? I would suggest redirecting them into the season pages. DLManiac ( talk) 22:46, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Love, Death & Robots#Flag icons for studio. — YoungForever (talk) 16:23, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
There is an RM discussion on a page that may be of interest to this WikiProject:
Thanks for your input. WanderingWanda (they/them) ( t/ c) 21:48, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
In case anyone has missed it, various hand-curated television portals are currently listed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion. They include:
probably among others, it is getting hard to keep track. Most of these are in need of maintainers, if anyone is interested. Espresso Addict ( talk) 00:54, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Battlestar Galactica is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Battlestar Galactica until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 06:47, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:The X-Files is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:The X-Files until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 06:58, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Would someone from this WikiProject mind taking a look at InterswitchSPAK and assessing it? It went through AfC so it probably meets WP:TVSHOW, but this edit here might indicate some COI or even undisclosed paid editing is taking place. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 14:25, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 April 23#Template:Big Brother sidebar . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 21:23, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
I feel sure that editors have used [[theatrical adaptation]] and [[TV adaptation]] in the parallel senses of
literary adaptation for the stage and for the TV screen. In fact, however, TV/television adaptation are two redirects to adaptation of television material for the cinema, or TV-to-film.
Moments ago I posted a longer notice of the problem at
Talk:Literary adaptation#Theatrical adaptation, TV adaptation.
(I post this short one also at
WP:LIT,
WP:CHILDLIT). --
P64 (
talk) 22:48, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
I have recently become concerned about the use of screenshots in {{
Infobox Television episode}}, or similar templates such as {{
Infobox Doctor Who episode}}. This is because nearly all of these screenshots used a non-free, and I believe that in most cases the images fail
WP:NFCC, particularly
WP:NFCC#8 (Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.
), a policy with legal considerations. Omitting many of these screenshots would not, I think, inhibit anyone's understanding of the infomation conveyed on the article. I understand there are series, such as
The Simpsons, who have reduced the use of these images, while other series, such as
Game of Thrones use screenshots on the vast majority of their episode articles. So I'm here to try to start a discussions about whether the use of these images is O.K. from a legal perspective and whether there is a good purpose to these images for them to stay. --
Ted
Edwards 21:25, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Horus from Thai Wikipedia. Recently there was a dispute in Thai Wikipedia whether inclusion of user-compiled data in television-related articles is allowed in Thai Wikipedia. The user involved claimed that English Wikipedia allowed such data, and therefore was confused whether the practice is not equally enforced in different Wikipedia. I, therefore, raised a question here: "Is inclusion of user-compiled data allowed in English Wikipedia (in television article context)?"
The pages in question are I Can See Your Voice Thailand, I Can See Your Voice Thailand (season 1), I Can See Your Voice Thailand (season 2), I Can See Your Voice Thailand (season 3) -- Horus ( talk) 04:43, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
I would like to make a proposal in merging two pages together. This would mean merging the Endemol wiki page into the Endemol Shine Group wiki page. These are the pages I am referring to.
/info/en/?search=Endemol_Shine_Group
The reason doing a merger proposal for these two pages makes logical sense because Endemol merged with Shine Group in 2015. You can already see on the description for Endemol Shine Group that it has incorporated this information, Endemol is incorporate in the History part of the Endemol Shine Group.
I think this is quite important because Endemol Shine make very popular shows globally such as Peaky Blinders and Black Mirror. However, if you were to type Endemol Shine into google, you see that Endemol comes up first. I think this is so confusing to people who are trying to understand the diference between endemol and endemol shine group. When I type it into google endemol is the first thing that seems to come up.
For this reason , I think we should merge the two so that it reflects the merger. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ojmarson ( talk • contribs) 16:27, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi... can I get some more eyes on Music of Stranger Things, specifically on the recent split of material from that page to Stranger Things (soundtrack) and Stranger Things 2 (soundtrack)? — Joeyconnick ( talk) 07:17, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
Please see the below:
Thanks. -- wooden superman 15:07, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello, |
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Beyond the Wall (Game of Thrones) that may be helped by your participation. Thank you for reading! Paine Ellsworth, ed. put'r there 15:33, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
A discussion related to this project has begun here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#Creating a new genre. Please feel free to add your thoughts there. MarnetteD| Talk 14:20, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Buffy the Vampire Slayer is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Buffy the Vampire Slayer (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 10:08, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I posted this question on a Talk page over a month ago, without any reply, but perhaps I put it in the wrong place. Are you by any chance able to provide more information?
/info/en/?search=User_talk:Unreal7#After_Dark_(TV_series)?
Just trying to find out what the rules on this are. Many thanks for any help. AnOpenMedium ( talk) 17:12, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
For some series the BBC will release the whole series as a box set on iPlayer on the same day that the first episode is aired (the iPlayer views count towards TV ratings even when viewed weeks before the "Air Date"), it will then go on to show the other episodes on a weekly schedule. So what date should go in the "Air Date" field of the Episode List template? The date that the individual episode is actually broadcast or the date that the box set was released? I can see merits for both sides, perhaps we need a new field in the template to handle this situation (e.g. Available Date / First Broadcast Date). I think both dates are valid but I'm wondering what others think. Any opinions? - X201 ( talk) 11:18, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi all. There is a discussion taking place on the Game of Thrones talk page regarding the removal of the Infobox images on every episode's article. Some much needed consensus is needed on this change. Please join in! Thanks!-- Templeowls17 ( talk) 12:02, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
There is a request for comment regarding whether IMDb should be added to User:XLinkBot/RevertReferencesList, which tells XLinkBot to automatically revert citations of IMDb by unregistered users and accounts under 7 days old, subject to additional limitations. If you're interested, please participate at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § RfC: IMDb. — Newslinger talk 18:19, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
This is just an interesting titbit for anyone that didn't know about it. If you're trying to hide a episode list template that already has a hidden comment, use the {{
Void}} template like {{
^|Episode list}}
, instead of <!--Episode list-->
. Using {{
^|Episode list}}
allows you to keep the hidden note without needing to do any weird things with the note like --><!--Note--><!--
. I've added an example below (edit to see it).
Just thought it might be helpful. -- / Alex/ 21 11:02, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Just stumbled upon Be A Star (UK TV series) on Wikidata, and to my surprise couldn't find it in any film/tv database (IMDb, thetvdb.com, TMDb, etc.). And when searching for a show with this title and these judges, Google and DuckDuckGo come up empty except Wikipedia mirrors/copies. You'd think that a recent show with such big names involved would have left some traces on the internet. I'm not very familiar with the English Wikipedia's procedures for cases like this, so maybe a regular could check it out. And if it's indeed a hoax, the other edits of the user who created it, Special:Contributions/ADunne05, probably should be checked, too. Regards, -- Kam Solusar ( talk)
Listed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Be A Star (UK TV series) - X201 ( talk) 14:07, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Now added to Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia in the 1-3 years section. - X201 ( talk) 13:25, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
There is a discussion on the reliability of Screen Rant on the reliable sources noticeboard. If you're interested, please participate at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § Screen Rant. — Newslinger talk 07:03, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
I've recently reverted the addition of the Game of Thrones season (and series) finale. THe episode premiered tonight to (presumably) millions of watchers. That said, I think its reasonable to assume that millions and millions more have not seen the episode as of yet.
I've been inactive on WikiEn for almost a year, and am unsure of my procedural footing regarding this revert. Doesn't it infringe on the studio/station's ability to make money if we don't wait a reasonable amount of time before posting the plot of the episode? I remember us doing precisely this with other media, both tv and film.
Some guidance, please. - Jack Sebastian ( talk) 03:37, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
this is about the infringement of the makers' ability to make money from their work. Otherwise, it's nothing but a made up statement. There is nothing preventing us from writing an episode summary after an episode airs for any series. It could be Game of Thrones or PAW Patrol. Also, sites like Amazon and iTunes have new episodes available the day after they air at 12:00 AM. So if a new episode airs at 9:00 PM, and that new episode is released at 12:00 AM the next day, that's only a wait of three hours. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 04:20, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
(
edit conflict) Wait. Do...do you - hey, tell me you understand that the Wiki-En isn't North America specific, right? That means this wiki is read well beyond our borders, from Seattle to Surabaya (where, as I've pointed out, the ep has not aired). We don't publish just for the North American readers. I'm getting the vibe that you don't think that, and its pretty effing important that you get on board with that, pronto.
This isn't about spoilers, Amaury; in 24 hours, my concerns evaporate. That will be the time when it can be reasonably expected that the general public (read: the world) has access to the content being offered on pay services. What we are doing is akin to video piracy. And those "contractual reasons" you noted? They keep folk from getting sued by the copyright holders. It allows the networks to enjoy the fruit of their labors.
Why are you in such a hurry? This isn't a race. We aren't in a hurry. We aren't a newspaper of a social media site. -
Jack Sebastian (
talk) 05:13, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
We need opinions on the following matters: Talk:The Iron Throne (Game of Thrones)#Let's try to keep this article balanced and Talk:The Iron Throne (Game of Thrones)#False balance. A permalink for it is here. In other words, we need opinions on assessing and presenting the critical consensus and/or appropriate weight per WP:Due. Rotten Tomatoes is part of the discussion. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 10:06, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Futurama is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Futurama (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 23:15, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
I just encountered an issue that prevented me from transcluding data from a season article to another page. After posting on
WP:VPT, the issue was found that using the <onlyinclude>
tags around the episode list prevent any other possible transclusions. Instead of those tags, an option that works and does not prevent other transclusions is to use <section begin=Episodes />
and <section end=Episodes />
(the "Episodes" text can be anything) instead of the onlyinclude tags, and {{#section:page name|Episodes}}
on the list of episodes page. --
Gonnym (
talk) 11:45, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello. You are invited to participate in two related RfCs: Talk:5G#RfC:Russian disinformation and Talk:RT (TV network)#RfC:Propaganda. R2 ( bleep) 18:29, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
During a dispute over my removal of cast years in the infobox, per infobox instructions, and editor made the following statement: it makes ZERO SENSE to ban years ONLY on the hosts entry I edited when several other entries in the SAME infobox (directors, producers, production companies, networks, video format) have them.
[2] This does seem a valid question. Should we be excluding years for all cast and crew listed in the infobox and not just the cast that we see and/or hear? --
AussieLegend (
✉) 16:16, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television#Boldfaced season number in the lead sentence of season articles. Radiphus ( talk) 05:36, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
The horizontal rule has been used for sometime now to combine episodes, for example episode 11/2 of Terra Nova (TV series). Last night an IP changed the code to combine the episodes, [3] which is an issue that even went to RfC so I reverted. This resulted in the IP making this edit stating "In that case, fix massive accessibility issue and tag unruly summary" in his edit summary. He hasn't made clear what the issue is but it seems to be use of the horizontal rule. However, I can find nothing in MOS:ACCESS about horizontal rules so my question is, should we be using horizontal rules or not? If so, then this affects many more than this article and needs to be addressed. I have opened a related discussion at WT:ACCESS#Use of the horizontal rule. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 06:52, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
rowspan="2"
to produce the 2 lines but just a visual separator, it is still places readers using screen readers at a disadvantage as it reads for them unwanted information - if a reader wanted to know who wrote the 2nd episode, it readers "Story by : Kelly Marcel & Craig Silverstein Teleplay by : Craig Silverstein & Kelly Marcel and Brannon Braga & David Fury", before finally reaching the actual information. There just is no reason for this. --
Gonnym (
talk) 07:30, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
1<hr>2
is somehow "better" than 1–2
for the episode numbering... I guess what I'm saying is that I see use of the horizontal rule even in a number of cases where it doesn't really "need" to be used, or where "splitting" episodes #1 and #2 into separate rows would be the better solution. --
IJBall (
contribs •
talk) 15:07, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
<hr />
tag, and can now be done through the numbered parameters, such as |DirectedBy_1=
, |DirectedBy_2=
, etc. -- /
Alex/
21 01:23, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Avoid using <br>
tags in adjacent cells to emulate a visual row that isn't reflected in the HTML table structure. This is a problem for users of screen readers which read tables cell by cell, HTML row by HTML row, not visual row by visual row.
This applies to <hr>
as well, given the identical nature as a block element. That's why the numbered parameters were implemented, and are already documented at
Template:Episode list."1a", "1b" numbering is needed in cases where the writers and/or directors are different between the two episodes/segments, so that the credits are listed with their correct episode. -- /
Alex/
21 11:32, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Looks like that is a small enough number to fix. Just needs agreement and then it can be fixed. - X201 ( talk) 07:26, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi all, I'm proposing a merge: List of Tamil soap operas currently airing → List of Tamil soap operas. Discussion can be found Talk:List of Tamil soap operas#Proposed merge with List of Tamil soap operas currently airing. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:04, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
I've taken a look at some talk show "season" articles, and there seems to be a systmatic issue with all of them. Here are the 2018 articles (used these since 2019 is only half-way done and these should be in better condition): Conan, James Corden, Jimmy Fallon, Seth Meyers and Stephen Colbert. As you can see, all these articles are just the episode tables, without any other information, with one not even having one source add to it (and most older talk show lists are similar with no sources). I'm sure a year ("season") of production can be notable, with special events and guests, controversies and other stuff to add to the production and of course critical reception, ratings, awards, etc. However, these articles don't have these. In their current form these should be merged into the main List of series episodes article. I'd appreciate other input on this. -- Gonnym ( talk) 19:48, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Big Brother Canada#Requested move 7 June 2019 . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 02:39, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Just an FYI, I've noticed "Luke Bickerton" being added to TV articles lately. e.g. 1 2 It's not always the same editor and others have been fixed by other editors. It's not always obvious that it's vandalism. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 11:38, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
The FAC for Soultaker has been going on for over a month and I'm hoping that it can get some more eyes on it before it closes. GamerPro64 22:45, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Recently, I came across that Charmed (2018 TV series) have been split into a season page and an individual episode pages for all 22 episodes. Per Wikipedia:Article splitting (television), it seems to be WP:TOOSOON, as WP:SPLIT, WP:SUMMARY, WP:SPINOUT, WP:LENGTH apply to the season page and individual episode pages. Can editors who are familiar with television article splitting give an input on this? — YoungForever (talk) 22:14, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Experienced TV editors: please weigh in on a discussion here about List of Twin Peaks episodes. Specifically, the discussion is about whether to remove ratings graphs added using the template Template:Television ratings graph, which has been designed for this purpose. I tried to open the discussion and ping interested users to no avail. One user, who refused to respond or meaningfully participate in the discussion, has continued reverting my edits to reinstate the graphs. All viewpoints welcome. Thank you — BLZ · talk 21:29, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Where are this projects' instructions on how to add ratings to an article? There's a brief mention of ratings in MOS:TVRECEPTION, but no actual guidelines on how it should be done. I ask because it appears that every editor is free to think that their way is the only right way to do it and it's starting to feel like I'm wasting my time contributing. I've been reverted for adding 7 day figures, and for adding 28 day figures, questioned for not adding 7 day figures, for combining references that point to the same page, for putting a reference in a column header (where the template documentation tells you to put it), I've been reverted, accused of disruptive editing and told to "stop dicking around with the ratings". Where in this project's MoS are the instructions on the accepted way to add ratings? - X201 ( talk) 07:41, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
There's a discussion regarding a potential WP:MOS on all fictional characters. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Manual of Style for fictional characters?. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 22:50, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Can you join to the discussion about Game of Thrones' season 8 critical reception summary so that it can reach a consensus? Sebastian James what's the T? 19:11, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Sandra_Oh#Canadian-American?. Joeyconnick ( talk) 20:49, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
I once again brought up the listings for season four of Family Matters not being correct on the episode list talk page. Some input is needed before I make such a correction. Mr. C.C. Hey yo! I didn't do it! 03:46, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Big Brother 21 (American season)#Day 1 Eviction. TheDoctorWho (talk) 05:18, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
I thought this BuzzFeedarticle from today might make some of you feel better about spoilers, LOL: Davis, Adam (June 27, 2019). "If You Read Wikipedia Summaries Instead of Watching Movies or TV Shows, You're Not Alone". BuzzFeed. — TAnthony Talk 01:10, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Can someone explain the rationale behind this directive, noted in some but not all the relevant fields, in Template:Infobox television? Particularly in the case of Jeopardy!, removing the year/season information greatly reduces the meaningfulness of the information presented without substantially improving the aesthetic of the presentation. It just makes it seem like the show had multiple hosts/producers/directors/announces etc. simultaneously, when a simple inclusion of year/season eliminates any such confusion and keeps things clean. Is not this rule more of a "foolish consistency" hobgoblin? (For reference, here is the first diff that introduced this language, although initially it was only for "starring".) Robert K S ( talk) 19:54, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
|first_aired=
is being used improperly. We should only be listing one first_aired
date, not every date as Jeopardy does. It includes the original run, weekly syndication that overlaps the original run, another run on the same channel (that appears to be a continuation of the first run) and a "daily syndication" date range. If additional dates need to be discussed they should be discussed in the prose. I note that
Robert K S has been edit-warring with other editors about this, rather than engaging on the talk page. --
AussieLegend (
✉) 11:05, 28 June 2019 (UTC)"Editors should attempt to follow guidelines, though they are best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply."The question is whether occasional exceptions do apply, and if so where. That's why I suggested the discussion should take place at the Talk page of the actual article of interest to gauge if there's consensus support for this being considered an "exception". However, I agree with AussieLegend that edit warring in this case is absolutely not justified, especially not without a Talk page discussion on the topic first. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 16:23, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
meta-discussion involving
personal attacks collapsed
|
---|
Leaving aside that I'm not sure why I'm the one accused of edit warring (notorious edit warrers/wikilawyers TPH and AldezD reverted my revert without discussion, and while misrepresenting even what the guideline said), "don't include dates" isn't as cut-and-dried of a rule for some shows as for others. Omitting dates on an article like Jeopardy! leaves the instant misimpression that there are multiple simultaneous hosts/announcers, or even that long-dead individuals are still involved with the show. I can see the want not to include dates/seasons when the persons get too numerous, as this makes the infobox too large, and would support a revised guideline that said as much. E.g., more than four hosts/announcers/etc, no dates. If accessibility is an issue, the small tags can be removed; the aesthetic benefit they provide is probably minimal. (But I think accessibility is a pretext here. Wikipedia has small text everywhere, particularly in infoboxes.) Robert K S ( talk) 17:22, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
|
See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#Todd (now Emily) VanDerWerff having come out as transgender. A permalink for it is here. As some or all here may know, VanDerWerff is commonly used as a source for the critical reception section in television show articles. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 17:19, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
It seems wrong that the British season-pages for Category:Ex_on_the_Beach don't have "British" in the disambiguation, while the article on the show as a whole is at Ex on the Beach (British TV series). I'm not sure which of these is incorrect (or whether it should be "UK" versus "British"). Can somebody propose the correct move to make this consistent? power~enwiki ( π, ν) 17:16, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
there ist the wrong link for Marc Benjamin (Dutch DJ c Benjamin Latupapua instead of Swiss actor Marc Benjamin Stähelin) in the English and Dutch version of this page. I tried to change it but I'm not sure it has worked... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.25.6.78 ( talk) 21:02, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
For pretty much any series, we see the writer(s) listed first followed by the director(s); as such, I'm wondering if we should follow that order here as well and swap things in the template. If this change were to go through, we wouldn't even need to go through and update articles, we would just update the template. The code in the articles would show directed by -> written by, but the display would show written by -> directed by. I can confirm this as I tried playing around with things a while ago by placing the "director" and "DirectedBy" parameters after the "writer" and "WrittenBy" parameters, and the output still showed directed by -> written by. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 18:19, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Similarly, I see that for the teleplay stuff, it's shown as teleplay by -> story by, so perhaps Template:StoryTeleplay should be Template:TeleplayStory, with teleplay being on the top and story being on the bottom. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 20:54, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Template updated. -- / Alex/ 21 11:18, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Big Brother 21 (American season)#Canadian ratings . Brojam ( talk) 04:34, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:The WB is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:The WB until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Northamerica1000 ( talk • contribs) 08:43, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Constantine (TV series)#Unproduced episode and the episode table. More opinions needed here – Issue is: Should unproduced episodes be included in the episodes table? -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 02:04, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Blood & Treasure#Two-hour pilot episode counts ONE episode. More opinions needed here – it's the perennial issue: when a pilot is broadcast as a two-hour pilot, does it count as one episode in the episode table, or two? IOW, do we follow sources, or the production codes? -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 02:04, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Dynasty (2017 TV series)#About Michael Michele as Dominique Deveraux promoted to be a series regular . — YoungForever (talk) 16:44, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Is the "No. in season" column always required in an episode list? I'm thinking specifically of a TV show such as the American version of Celebrity Big Brother, for which the episodes are called Episode 1, Episode 2, etc. Our episodes list has a "No. in season" column, which seems completely redundant to me, given the titles of the individual episodes. The column could easily be removed without any loss of information to our readers. Any thoughts? Thanks, A Thousand Doors ( talk | contribs) 01:21, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
I'm a little confused by this article -
Total Drama All-Stars and Pahkitew Island (and probably the others of the series as well). As far as I can tell it's a fake animated reality series TV series about an animated series about a fake reality series (edit: fixed description), yet it uses all those (horrible) reality tables in the article and since (I'm assuming) the page was too large, split the actual relevent information, the episode list, to a different article
List of Total Drama All-Stars and Pahkitew Island episodes. Is this really how these articles should be? --
Gonnym (
talk) 10:01, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Start up studio staffed by Conan refugees. Sources exist and can be improved. WP:NEXIST, and WP:Notability questions. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 13:04, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Pennyworth (TV series)#About Epix Schedule of Episode Titles . — YoungForever (talk) 14:55, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
Do any of you edit Big Brother/Bigg Boss-related articles? Bigg Boss Tamil 3 could probably use some policing. Something like 10-15% of the page is written in bold face, and I'm not exactly clear on what content is pertinent or what content is just fancruft. Especially note the expandable table under Weekly summary. Any extra eyes would be appreciated. I semi-protected the article after a couple of anons were taking ownership of it, and as soon as I did, they finally logged into their user accounts. SMH... Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 14:52, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Cloak & Dagger (TV series)#Split the character section . This has been going since April 2019. — YoungForever (talk) 16:49, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi all, any thoughts on how to best deal with the wall of names in the infobox at Nach Baliye? I deleted them on the basis that they were asinine but anon seems to disagree. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 15:16, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Arrow (TV series)#Transclusions. -- / Alex/ 21 09:03, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:The Boys (2019 TV series)#Shaun Benson as Ezekiel. — YoungForever (talk) 14:33, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
A lot of users/ IPs are adding Netflix links as external links Roma Daredevil calling it the official page like here. So is it fine too add Netflix links for original programming as they might not be according to external links policy ( WP:ELNO). Sid95Q ( talk) 15:35, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
that the Netflix links are the official websites for Netflix originals.And if there is a production website for the Netflix original series, then it's only a production website. — YoungForever (talk) 19:50, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
granting the site an exception (as an "official" site") to do just that-- to be added to every articleNot per WP:ELMINOFFICIAL. Netflix should be an insertion of last resort. -- Izno ( talk) 14:06, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Dose anyone want to help with Draft:List of animated shows by episode count Fanoflionking 18:33, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Mindhunter (TV series)#Dennis Rader. More opinions are needed here to reach a consensus. — YoungForever (talk) 15:12, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
I am working on the List of Money Heist episodes list. The show's original run in Spain had 15 episodes, but Netflix re-cut the episodes into 22 for international distribution (which affects most en-wiki readers). Are there shows with similar "problems" (incl. maybe animes)? I'd like to learn how their episode lists handled the situation. – sgeureka t• c 12:17, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Manifest (TV series)#About the Guest section. — YoungForever (talk) 17:37, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi! It's not exactly in this area, but a YouTube paid series Escape the Night has some issues with copyvio and WP:FANCRUFT. Any help in cleaning up the issues would be appreciated. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 19:30, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
I'm not sure that Best Ever Trivia Show meets the notability guidelines. The show's been on the air for three months and doesn't even have an IMDb page. The only sources I've found so far are press releases and non-notable fan blogs. Should it go to AFD? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 04:20, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Is dark comedy a TV genre suitable for the |genre=
parameter of the infobox?
Invader Zim's genres are well-sourced, but it seems odd to describe it that way and I don't find it listed at
List of genres#Film and television formats and genres. I note that
M*A*S*H (TV series) is also indicated as a dark comedy. Thanks,
Cyphoidbomb (
talk) 21:54, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
For my own edification, is there any way to add a white border around a reference if we're pasting it atop a dark background? Note List of Jacob Two-Two (TV series) episodes#Season 1 (2003). I know the alternative is to change the arbitrary color scheme, but I still think I should know if there is a way to do this. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 14:40, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
Editors are still removing cast from the infobox at Loose Women. There has also been a request to restore the ridiculous table of which presenter sat in which chair on a particular night that I mentioned in this discussion. Some extra eyes on this article would therefore be appreciated. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 10:57, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
The user Bankster ( talk · contribs) has been making edits to various articles on specialty television channels in an effort to " standardize" certain terms.
However, there has been disregard for regional use of specific terms to describe such services, particularly the editor's specific insistence on using the term " pay television" to refer to any channel not free-to-air. "Pay television" typically refers to things like HBO, standalone premium services not in bundles. In the U.S., there isn't a clear term, and "cable channel" is used most often since that was the original form of multichannel television. In Canada, specialty channel is not only a common term, but also has specific legal implications, since licenses are required from our regulator. At the same time, I was wanting to shift the Canadian specialty television articles to refer to them all as "specialty television" (or pay television where applicable) channels as opposed to the specific discretionary service category, as the former is more informative because pretty much every channel falls within "discretionary services" now.
But anyway, Bankster has often undone reversions to his changes with no explanation, and has made relatively few attempts to discuss their changes with other editors. There is clearly consensus against his changes, as seen by me and others. I think any mass changes in terms, especially ones that use misnomers, should be discussed first. ViperSnake151 Talk 20:55, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
So, we currently have Category:American anthology television series for anthology series, but would it be worth splitting this category into two for season- and episodic-anthology series? For example, Category:American anthology-season television series for series such as American Crime Story, American Horror Story and Scream, and Category:American anthology-episode television series for series such as Heartstrings, Into the Dark, Two Sentence Horror Stories and The Twilight Zone. -- / Alex/ 21 07:23, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
So I recently reverted a user's edit on The Masked Singer (American season 1), stating, "Moreso trivial information"- it was basically a table which outlines what the panelists had as their main guess for who was under a mask (before being unmasked) and whether they were correct or wrong. I could be entirely wrong in my revert, but it just seems like something more trivial that I would find on a Wikia page as opposed to being on a Wikipedia page.
The user has since added a talk page comment about it, but not sure what to respond. I've been looking through guidelines of Wikipedia and well as MOS:TV (as well as this WikiProject's talk archives), and the best I could find was WP:NOTSTATS. Now again, I'm not sure but my revert could be entirely wrong, but it does seem more trivial. Yes, as the user has pointed out, "Isn't the whole basis of this show about guessing who the masked singers are? Half of the minutes are dedicated to the clues and the panelists trying to interpret them."- but I would think that the clues given for each masked singer can be interpreted however anyone wants to interpret it. Just to give some more context, here is an example of a masked singer reveal with the panelists' final guesses as to who it is.
WP:NPOVFAQ and WP:NPOV might (?) come into play in this too, but I really don't know now. I'm struggling between it being encyclopedic information and trivial information better suited for a Wikia currently. Thanks. Magitroopa ( talk) 03:06, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Animation#Lots_of_unsourced,_non-notable_articles. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 20:58, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
I would appreciate some comments at this discussion, whatever your opinion may be. 4meter4 ( talk) 15:12, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
This is just an FYI for anyone involved in the season articles for Dynasty (2017 TV series). All three have been moved without discussion after an editor who should know better submitted a request at WP:RM/TR claiming that the moves were uncontroversial. [14] This resulted in a mess at at the LoE page and all 3 season articles that TAnthony was fortunately quick to fix. One reason why I felt it necessary to mention this here is that the original season article pages are now redirects to a disambiguation page that does not mention the season articles at all, so it's a bit of a dead end for most readers. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 03:46, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
Not sure if this is the project to ask, but can't think of one better. Article is a retired physicist who appeared as a main guest in multiple episodes of a PBS documentary interview series, over the years. Added a table of appearances at the end of the article, was deleted as "Way too much". Thought such tables were pretty standard -- not for documentary appearances? Hyperbolick ( talk) 16:24, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
A bot was instructed to change all "Category:Screenplays by..." to "Category:Films with screenplays by..." Unfortunately some of these were TV episodes or series. I don't know that anyone has actually gone though and fixed this yet. Further reading: User talk:BrownHairedGirl/Archive/Archive 051#Are TV episodes considered films? @ BrownHairedGirl, Loriendrew, MER-C, Marcocapelle, Newshunter12, Woodensuperman, and JJMC89:. Probably some query to identify the TV articles would be helpful. – xeno talk 13:55, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
right use this one. 1026 hits. Previous problem was a sub cat looping around to another cat. This is a good starting point. - X201 ( talk) 15:22, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
The Terror is an anthology series which originally housed all of its related content in its main article, before it was split into season articles somewhat recently. A short discussion happened on its talk page, but nothing really came from it.
This is what the main article looked like before it was split into two season articles. You can compare that to the current version for differences. The differences? Essentially none, except the recurring cast list now only exists in the season articles. I brought this point up at the talk page, for being the sole creation for the season articles to exist: to house an exhaustive cast list similar to IMDB. Even so, there's no reason we can't also list recurring characters in the main article, this is a normal practice. Now looking at the season articles, The Terror (season 1) and The Terror: Infamy, they contain zero original content that was not already present in the main article before the merge. Simply, there's no reason why this all can't exist in one article, as the main article is nowhere near large enough that it needs to be split and the season articles are barebones and expand on nothing that didn't already exist. The only way for the season articles to exist if there was no main article, but I doubt that would ever happen. Drovethrughosts ( talk) 14:11, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Portal:Television in the United Kingdom has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Television in the United Kingdom. Certes ( talk) 11:41, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
Opinions sought at Talk:Police procedural#Merger proposal, please. Meticulo ( talk) 16:32, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
Would anyone like to take a look at the above articles? I came across the three of them today after the British series just had its first trailer released, and had to make a multitude of edits to format them properly ( [15], [16], [17]), and I've had to move all three of the articles to conform with NCTV ( [18], [19], [20]). -- / Alex/ 21 02:14, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
Good Afternoon,
I came across the American Beauty Star Wikipedia page and I wanted to get feedback on edits I thought the page could use.
I found the information page for season 1 and 2 that shows hosts, judges, and contestants on my source [1] so I wanted to add that information to the Wikipedia page. I would also add my source under the references section.
Would someone be able to advise if they think these would be acceptable edits for this Wikipedia page or if you see any issues with the edits I am proposing?
Thank you so much,
Ariverae777 ( talk) 23:07, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
References