![]() | 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 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | → | Archive 15 |
Proposals at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Desperate Housewives, Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#ER, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Law & Order, have all passed the threshold for work groups. Would the members of this project be interested in taking them on? John Carter ( talk) 18:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Actor Rock Hudson, playing character Adam Trenton, is asked to be logical and replies something like: "There's nothing logical about a 115-pound blond spending $2's worth of gas to drive a two-ton automobile 15 (?) miles to save 5 cents on a can of peas..." or something along those lines. Would appreciate the exact quote or suggestions where to ask. Thank you, Shir-El too 17:32, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Lost Our Lisa on Peer Review. Your comments would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Peer review/Lost Our Lisa/archive1. Cirt ( talk) 09:23, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
(Similar post at WT:FILMS) I've been wasting plenty of time at http://www.hulu.com recently, and I'm wondering: should a link be placed to a) full-length episodes that are on the site in articles on that particular episode, and/or b) the link to the official landing page of a TV series for those shows whose official sites do not currently stream full-length episodes (for example, http://www.hulu.com/the-riches)? I imagine it would certainly be a useful resource. Perhaps a template like "Name_of_show at Hulu" could be developed? Budding Journalist 22:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Your Template {{{
WikiProject Television}}
causes issues when ever there is needs-infobox=yes. It can been seen on these pages
Talk:Brothers and Sisters (1979 TV series) &
Talk:Kraft Television Theatre and possibly any other pages within the
Television articles without infoboxes category.
Peachey88 (
Talk Page |
Contribs)
12:30, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
A discussion has been started at Template talk:Infobox Television as to whether the flag icons belong in Television infoboxes and if they should be stripped. Since that is a relatively low traffic page, I thought a heads up here would be good before a decision is made by only a handful of people. AnmaFinotera ( talk) 13:31, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Anyone want to tackle cleaning up List of 2point4 children episodes and List of One Foot in the Grave episodes. I've tagged both needing expert attention including formatting to follow more standard episode list format (such as using episode list template, wikifying dates, etc), for needing a better lead (only one sentence), and needing references. They already has episode summaries, so I think if someone were willing to tackle that, they could be a potential featured list candidate relatively quickly. However, I've had previous dealings with the lists' primary editor, which were unpleasant to say the least. I'd rather not deal with him again, hence my asking someone else to volunteer. AnmaFinotera ( talk) 22:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
List of Degrassi: The Next Generation episodes, and each season of the show has been nominated for Featured Topic. If anyone wants to pop along to review and comment, the link is here: Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Seasons of Degrassi: The Next Generation. Cheers! -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 00:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Should this be renamed, deleted, merged or what? I see it just being a list of just about everything that isn't an article already. I'm leaning towards merge and/or delete. However, isn't a catch-all list a bit trivial and not necessary? If anything, it needs a bit of cleanup. I somehow don't think every person listed has importance. Plus, the whole list of Dr. Crane show callers seems a bit trivial. Plus the article has poor sourcing. RobJ1981 ( talk) 06:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
As a note, the project template can now properly handle FL class for featured lists, so please use FL instead of FA when a list passes through FLC. They also will be properly categorized in Category:FL-Class television articles. Additionally, a much needed fix was done to stop using the military history's class file, which resulted in all of our television articles also be categorized as being military history articles! Attention was called to the issue by their changing their class file, which broke our template. We now have our own class file so this shouldn't be a problem in the future. AnmaFinotera ( talk) 18:34, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
User:Robinepowell has been removing the series overview and DVD release information from the main Degrassi TNG episode list, and changing Canadian release dates on the various season pages, claiming that they are all wrong because TVShowsOnDVD.com says so. Three editors and I have all asked her to stop, we've tried discussing with her but she continues to basically say she's right "because she says so" and revert. The main list ended up being protected, though I felt she should have been blocked due to her violating 3RR. TVShowsOnDVD is great for American releases, but not always correct on Canadian. Still, she said the dates were wrong so we did check, as can be seen at Talk:List of Degrassi: The Next Generation episodes#Degrassi DVDs but she completely refuses to engage in discussion on the article talk page, only leaving barely civil messages on our user pages. Following the dispute resolution process, I'm leaving a message here for project input at the main talk page, and in the various season pages regarding her date changes and which source should be used, and if the series overview table should be removed (though silent consensus in our featured lists says it belongs). AnmaFinotera ( talk) 05:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Buffy the Vampire Slayer (TV series) has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 21:12, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I was hoping that some people here, especially those with experience of having seen/helped get episode lists to featured list status, to check this article out and see if they have any suggestions. I put up a peer review, but without much response. The PR did help the article, but I came here in hopes of getting help from those working on other episode list articles. - AMK152( Talk • Contributions • Send message) 22:23, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Hey there,
I've been inactive for while on Wikipedia, but i'd like to get active again. One of the reasons is I have a new job, as the head of IT for Channel North Television, a new regional television station in Whangarei, New Zealand.
As part of my position, I have access to and knowledge about all the key components of a television station, for production as well as broadcast. We have a decent budget, so we have a reasonably high-tech system.
I'm wondering if you guys would be interested in any photos or information on it. I'm sure I could get a few interesting shots. We have full broadcast automation, a complete studio with control room, microwave systems, fibre network stuff, and our office area. It could probably spice up quite a few articles.
If anyone is interested in getting me to take some photos i'd be happy to, and if anyone wants any information or wants me to improve any articles i'd be happy to do so.
If I don't reply for a while then send me an email from my userpage, i'm very forgetful.
Matt/TheFearow (Talk) 01:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
The Principal and the Pauper is up at WP:FAC, comments would be appreciated. FAC discussion page is here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Principal and the Pauper. Cirt ( talk) 15:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Highlander: The Series (season 1) is currently a FLC. Please feel free to leave comments at Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Highlander:_The_Series_(season_1). Your input will be much appreciated. Have a nice day, Rosenknospe ( talk) 08:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Is it the general feeling here that any show which has actually aired on major network television is notable. for example Bram & Alice, which someone has prodded. I deprodded it for discussion. I 'm not really qualified to work on this one, so I'm notifying the people here. DGG ( talk) 22:09, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, are you aware that the {{ WikiProject Television}} template puts articles into a non-existent category, " Category:Television articles with comments"? — Cheers, JackLee – talk– 14:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, thought I'd highlight the issue. I'll leave it to you guys working on this WikiProject to decide what to do with it. — Cheers, JackLee – talk– 15:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
The Xenophile sock is back and flooding Wikipedia with Xena articles and lists. The only good edits so far were to create season pages for Xena, which were desperately needed. However, they are in bad shape and need to be cleaned up, including proper formatting, lead expansion, image correction, referencing, and adjusting to transclude the episode lists into List of Xena: Warrior Princess episodes. They probably also need renaming. Could probably end up being 7 FLs and an FT if someone wants to tackle, and doesn't mind having to occasionally deal with the socks.
That's the list. When cleaned up, some of the redirected episode articles should probably be adjusted to redirect to the appropriate season pages. I have gone though and tagged all for their issues, removed the fan gushing (and believe me, it was gushing), and fixed the images. The cast sections needs to be converted from big tables to more useful prose, and the toher stuff still needs to be done. AnmaFinotera ( talk) 17:16, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
As an update, season 3 & 4 have also now been reformatted and updated to have the episode lists transcluded into the main list from those season pages. Still having trouble from the xenophile socks, but no one else seems to be caring all that much. :( AnmaFinotera ( talk) 00:42, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
We are trying to guage a final consensus as to whether flag icons should or should not be used in television infoboxes. If you have a view on this, please go HERE, and voice your support/opposition/neutrality. Thank you. Talk Islander 14:22, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
An anon IP has made a proposal at Template talk:Episode list#Please add a new field called "ProductionNotes" trying to get a new field added called "ProductionNotes" for shoving trivia and other such things into the episode summary table. Personally opposed, but be good if more project people read his proposal and offered their own thoughts as well. AnmaFinotera ( talk) 14:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Nick GAS Although, the entire Nick GAS schedule has been look the same since Finders Keepers left in 2006. but the main situation was Get the Picture been played 4 times in the afternoon hours on both EST & CST zones while Nick Arcade played twice during the early morning hours and it been 1-2pm ET on weekdays since April 2004 and on weekends since December 2004 but it have'nt been back in the morning hours since the weekend of September 4th, 2004. it will excepted to be replaced with ethier 1 of show is airing (Nickelodeon GUTS, Nick Arcade or Double Dare 2000) or 1 of any shows is not airing (Wild and Crazy Kids, Finders Keepers, Family Double Dare, Double Dare or Global GUTS) at 1-2pm ET, 4-5pm ET and 3-4am ET. it will affect the lineup.
Disney Channel Starting May 17th, Disney Channel is changing the entire schedule, is this true that Disney Channel chaning the whole lineup, soon? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.230.191.173 ( talk) 00:45, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I seriously think that WP needs a task force [or section thereof] devoted to television technologies and related broadcast engineering/operations. I have read many an article about such that have so many issues that any single-user revision to correct would require such large deletion and time spent working that it would likely be marked as vandalism. Redoing the pages elsewhere then moving them in as part of a task force or just working in place, quickly, with research pre-compiled through a series of discussions could prove very useful. -- tonsofpcs ( Talk) 03:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
My, what a big WikiProject you have! I was interested in starting up a Arrested Development taskforce that would have this project as its parent (perhaps the Comedy WikiProject would be another parent?). I wasn't sure if I needed permission or anything before I start up a proposal etc. Thanks, Joelster ( talk) 00:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Working mostly on and off (mostly off) on America's Test Kitchen. Couple questions...
Thanks! — Rob ( talk) 20:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi everybody, I've just written an article called Introduction to genetics, which tries to explain the important concepts in DNA, genes, and so on, in an absolutely non-technical way. I was wondering if any people with no background in science would have time to go through this article and find the pieces where it isn't quite clear enough or fails to explain things properly. Comments on its talkpage please. Tim Vickers ( talk) 18:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Is Wikproject Avatar a task force of Wikiproject Television, or is it it's own stand alone Wikiproject? The WP:TV page say were are, but the WP:AVATAR page does not. Some of us at Wikiproject Avatar would like this cleared up. Rau's Speak Page 17:27, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
{{WikiProject Television|class={{{class|}}}|avatar=yes|avatar-importance={{{importance|}}}}}, and then used AWB to substitute each transclusion of the template. I nominated at least five subpages for deletion (there are a lot of inactive subpages), and moved the rest. I also deleted some unnecessary redirects caused by the moves (like for the members page). In addition, I added the List, Category, and Template-Class categories for the project, etc. If anything is wrong, please tell me here or on my talk page. For now, everything is good, I hope. — Parent5446 ( t n e l) 02:41, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
It's one of those things where it doesn't exactly matter what we call it, but thinking of it as a task force helps people to think of the project with a flow. For a lack of better words.. -- Ned Scott 03:42, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Didn't see a place to put television-related AFDs, so Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of stock characters in comedy. Cheers. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 04:35, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
The various lists of programs broadcast by NBC, ABC, and CBS are nearly complete and de-redded. However, the DuMont program list remains mostly red. I assume the age of these shows hinders development on associated articles. Help with countering systemic bias on Wikipedia is greatly appreciated. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:33, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Could anyone review the article It Feels Like Magic? ( 4Kids' edit of Winx Club's vert first episode)
I wonder if that article is worth to stay on the English Wikipedia.-- JSH-alive (talk) (cntrbtns) (mail me) 08:15, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Anyone want to adopt the article for Celia (TV series). The creator asked for an assessment from the project on April 28th, which I provided. I offered lots of additional help and advice to get the article in line with our style guidelines, etc. After I nominated some other articles the creator had made for deletion, however, he went all nuts on me (and got himself blocked for a day for making a crude insult). I don't want to deal with such an immature person anymore. However, some comments he made in the AfDs has me concerned that he will undo all of the fixing up done on the article out of spite, so I'd like to ask someone else to consider taking this one on to their watch list. For the most part, its in okay shape, except the episode summaries are all too long (though better than the huge things they were), the cast/characters needs to be merged into one section, and the episode airdates are only years. Could also use more referencing, but mostly would just like someone to keep an eye on it to keep it from being reverted back to its previous state. -- Collectonian ( talk · contribs) 15:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
List of Last of the Summer Wine episodes is in dire need of some clean up. The show spans nearly 30 series (seasons). The episode listings are all in odd formats, not using {{ episode list}} and instead being tabled with the plot summary and "episode notes" beside the titles and air dates. The series overview box is in bad shape as well, and it could use some lead work. Anyone feel like tackling this large revamp? -- Collectonian ( talk · contribs) 08:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
See Talk:Smallville (TV series)#Merge all character lists for discussion. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 13:14, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
There is a proposal to add a field to the infobox for "panelists" for panel type shows. Feel free to come weigh in. -- Collectonian ( talk · contribs) 18:30, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I am currently on a GA improvement drive for Pride and Prejudice (1995 TV serial), which was a six-episode adaption of a novel, with quite a few important characters to build the story. This makes the article fall somewhere between the TV MOS and the film MOS and possibly a book MOS that I am not aware of. Having FA quality in mind, I have thought of three options to cover the characters:
I don't feel strongly about either option, but I figure it can't hurt to get some input before I settle on one. Maybe someone already has experience with something like this so that I don't have to reinvent the wheel. – sgeureka t• c 10:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Is the "Name of the Show" section really neccesary? I'd like some opinions. Yojimbo501 ( talk) 23:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#new_user_mass-editing_templates. If oyu can't find the thread, look at my diff -- Enric Naval ( talk) 18:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
This note is being placed on the talk pages for both the film project and the television project as the discussion will overlap their articles. Also, I am posting this on these projects discussion pages as there are too many articles involved to list these on each separate shows talk page.
Recently User:24.129.100.84 began adding [[Category:Films over xx hours long]] to the pages of various television serials and miniseries. I have removed these based on the fact that these categories have usually been reserved for films that have had a theatrical release. I cannot find this listed as a specific criteria so this is the first point to which I would like both projects to come to a consensus. Should TV programs be considered films for these categories?
Some made for TV films may fit this category as long as it is the official runtime, sans commercials, that we are basing this on. But to list television miniseries and serials as films is a misnomer. They are usually broadcast over multiple nights and have breaks which include closing and opening credits between the episodes.
A look at this users contributions page [13] will show how many TV programs and miniseris have had these categories added to them. Should a consensus be reached that these categories might apply then we will need to set some criteria for what does and what does not fit the wording of the categories. My thanks to you for your attention in this matter. MarnetteD | Talk 20:42, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I've been working on a rewrite of Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/How to write about television programs in my sandbox (see User:Bignole/Television MOS), in the hopes that the television community can have an official style guideline similar to the guideline that the film community has. From what I've seen, the current page (which is not a guideline) has been rather inactive, and I know that when I edit articles I generally look to the film guideline as its pretty applicable in most cases. I feel that we need our own official guideline for MOS (you can see the initial discussion over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television/How to write about television programs#Update).
I'm hoping to get some fresh eyes look over it, tighten prose, include links to relevant policies and guidelines that I may have missed, and question whatever is on the page that they disagree with. This will also help with the problems associated with WP:EPISODE. With this MOS, we can remove any style information from EPISODE and have it focus solely on being a notability guideline (if it continues to exist at all, but that's a different discussion). So please, share your thoughts on the sandbox talk page as it's easier to make changes to the information if the discussion is taking place on the same page. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 02:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
There's some anime TV series, like Gungrave (anime) and Mononoke (anime), that disambiguate by adding "(anime)" instead "(TV series)" as recommended by WP:TV-NAME. I think they should be moved (i.e. Gungrave (TV series), Mononoke (TV series)), the same way Justice League (animated series) and Gargoyles (animated series) have been moved. What do you think?-- Nohansen ( talk) 03:28, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
In my gnome-ish way, I've been working through the lists at Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/List of TV shows over the last several months. It's been a combination of removing articles from these lists that have infoboxes, redirecting redlinks where articles exist under different names, ensuring that the lists are correctly sorted between 'missing' and 'no infobox' - various tasks. When I started, the main project page showed that the effort was 16% complete, which wasn't accurate - by the time I'm through all the alphabetical lists, I suspect the true picture will reveal that this effort is more like 50% complete.
A couple of thoughts/questions, however. First, as I've been doing this, I've been following the instructions on the main project page to tag the talk pages for articles with the "needs television infobox" template where appropriate. It occurs to me that it might have been nice to come here when I started and post a note that I was doing this, as this category has now grown five-fold over the last few months - it's accurate, but it might come as a surprise to people engaged in WP:TV who focus on filling in the infobox gaps. So, apologies.
Second, it's also occurred to me today that it might actually have been better to have been tagging those talk pages with the "WP:Television" template and the needs infobox option, rather than just the template I was using. Before I keep going, or even think about going back to change the others when I'm done, I just wanted to check if the project thinks this would be valuable or if simply the "needs television infobox" template is enough. If you'd prefer the former, I'll proceed accordingly, and also change the instruction on the main project page.
Thanks, Mlaffs ( talk) 17:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
A request for comment has been made to determine if the Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) proposal has consensus. Since this project deals with many fictional topics, I am commenting here. Input on the proposal is welcome here. -- Pixelface ( talk) 01:17, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I'd be grateful if some editors would be willing to give me some feedback on Last of the Summer Wine. I still feel it is almost at FA but the editors who tipped the balance to oppose in the last FAC refused to elaborate on what they thought was wrong with the article beyond some vague and cursory comments. I've opened a peer review request at Wikipedia:Peer review/Last of the Summer Wine/archive3 if anyone is willing to review the article. Thanks and cheers! Redfarmer ( talk) 15:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
I see that a taskforce for The X-Files has recently been created and was wondering if the WikiProject Television template could be updated to enable tagging the relevant articles. I would have left this message at the template talkpage, but wasn't sure if there had even been consensus for the creation of the taskforce. -- Beloved Freak 19:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
The article is just a cluttered mess. I count at least three sections dedicated to trivia. Anyone want to help clean it up? RobJ1981 ( talk) 04:50, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey all. I have a rather specific request. Does anyone have a copy of Toons! The Animation Magazine #1? Toons was a short-lived Wizard spinoff from the late 1990s. The issue I'm looking for had a picture of Pikachu on the cover. I mainly want it because I think it might have some information on "Nazis on Tap", the "lost" Simpsons short. If anyone has a copy, or could let me know how to get one, I'd really appreciate it. Zagalejo ^^^ 06:27, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
This image has been vandalized: Image:Sleeping_Beauty.jpg. Can anyone put back the previous DVD cover image of the TV show and replace the image in the infobox for Sleeping Beauty (Faerie Tale Theatre episode)? Also, I think that article needs your project tag. Thanks! -- Ssilvers ( talk) 14:09, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
List of Avatar: The Last Airbender episodes has been nominated for the removal of its Featured list status. The discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of Avatar: The Last Airbender episodes. Regards, Matthewedwards ( talk • contribs • email) 01:21, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Note: This discussion should be merged with Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Television/Style_guidelines#MOS_proposal for an advertised, centralized discussion on Television-related style guidelines
I boldly offered
this edit to the infobox part of the project page:
old:
The general infobox for an actor is {{ Infobox actor}}. For voice actors use {{ Infobox actor voice}}.
new:
The general infobox for an actor is {{ Infobox actor}}. For voice actors use {{ Infobox actor voice}}. In general, it is best to list actors (and not the characters they portray) in a semblance of encyclopedic order, such as alphabetical.
This addresses the need to remove in-universe writing within the infobox as well as addressing the need for a less whimsical ordering of actors listed in the infobox. It is not a command, but a recognition of how it has generally been done throughout other projects. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 19:46, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
What is considered notable enough for Wikipedia? Is it:
Thanks. Matthewedwards ( talk • contribs • email) 06:53, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Can anyone check all Pages that link to the article Winx Club and if the link was added on some pages in the manner of vandalism or something, please remove it.-- JSH-alive (talk) (cntrbtns) (mail me) 07:45, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Currently, 2894 articles assigned to this project, or 29.5%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 18 June 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page. -- B. Wolterding ( talk) 11:50, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey all. There's a bit of an edit war going on at the Degrassi episodes. Seems like the pages for all the seasons have come under battle, but the main discussion is going on at Talk:List of Degrassi: The Next Generation episodes#Disagreement over episode numbers. The conflict is whether or not hour-long episodes should be considered as one or two episodes, given that they may have run that way in syndication. I'm only giving a third opinion on the page, but perhaps someone from this project could go over and add to the consensus. Thanks! — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 02:59, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.
Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot ( Disable) 21:24, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
This list is in seriously bad shape. Only one episode is using {{ episode}}, resulting in the pilot episode actually appearing at the bottom of the page. Guessing there is something messed up in the code. Its missing airdates, citations, and a lead. Summaries themselves seem okay, except the formatting, so could possibly be cleaned up fairly quick and put into good shape if someone wants to give it a whirl. -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 11:55, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
This is a continuation of Wikipedia talk:Television episodes/Archive 4#Multiple episodes/story arcs and how to deal with them. Seeing as the point I made there is the same point I want to make now:
We need a process for articles on episodes with multiple parts. So far, we have four types of these articles, with examples:
*** One article Multiple articles Episodes with the same name Exodus (Lost) Differently-named episodes in a distinct story arc. Stewie Griffin: The Untold Story As you can see, there is a level of inconsistency here, thus there are two questions to be asked:
- Do episodes with similar titles that air in succession warrant their own articles, or a summary article?
- Do episodes in a distinct story arc warrant their own articles or a summary article, if the arc has a common name? [such as An Unearthly Child or Stewie Griffin
- If the arc does not have a common name, should there be a summary article or seperate articles?
Thoughts to the original two questions? The previous discussion whimpered out with no result, so I've brought it here for a wider audience. Sceptre ( talk) 13:12, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
An important discussion on " Should WikiProjects get prior approval of other WikiProjects (Descendant or Related or any ) to tag articles that overlaps their scope ? " is open here . We welcome you to participate and give your valuable opinions. -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - , member of WikiProject Council. 14:38, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I was looking around, but could not find a template appropriate for usage in television documentary articles. Anyone know where I can find one? - Hexhand ( talk) 11:01, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
(see previous discussion for background information)
I have created the Broadcast Engineering and Technology Taskforce under WikiProject: Television. If you are interested, please join and begin discussion of technical issues. -- tonsofpcs ( Talk) 18:09, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I recently uploaded three images for use in the documentary article, The Gunpowder Plot: Exploding The Legend::
I would like to make sure the image rationale/summary is durable. Could someone with experience in this area take a look and offer some feedback? - Hexhand ( talk) 01:02, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I've initiated discussion at
WT:FILM#Renaming of filming terms about renaming articles about film terminology to be properly disambiguated. I noticed that WP:TV disambiguates with (television)
, while WP:FILM can't quite do that with (film)
, since it is reserved for individual film articles. At this point, it seems likely that we will move to (film terminology)
, but I wanted to make sure that we avoided any possible issues. In this case, there may be some overlap between film and television in the terminology like
Split screen (film). Do editors at WP:TV have any suggestions on how to address this kind of overlap? We'll keep it separate if possible, but with exceptions like the aforementioned example, we should have an alternative solution. (Note: Looks like WP:TV has
Category:Television terminology; WP:FILM may try to make a similar category in
Category:Film terminology, so we can mention both categories in any kind of overlap.) Please comment at the discussion link! :) —
Erik (
talk •
contrib) -
17:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
I've worked up a potential guideline on how to write plot summaries at Wikipedia:How to write a plot summary. I welcome input from members of this project as I try to move the page to guideline status. Thanks. Phil Sandifer ( talk) 21:03, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Comments appreciated at Wikipedia:Peer review/Jason Beghe/archive1. Cirt ( talk) 21:09, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
I was referred to this page to find a few other editors who can help. We need help improving The Partridge Family article. Much of it is pretty well written, but it currently lacks in-line citations and could use more sources to verify it's content. We do NOT need editors who want to do drive-by tagging and commit forms of sabatoge. Lord knows we have had our share of smarty-pants who just want to be bossy and tell you whats wrong with the article without actually doing any of the work. So if you have a heart and want to work WITH other people with a cooperative spirit to improve an article about this wonderful TV show, which I personally hold close to my heart PLEASE drop by the discussion page and say Hi. We want to make this article perfect! Thank you! ShirleyPartridge ( talk) 21:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
I Love Money was assesed as High Importance and Start Quality. I don't have a problem with Start quality, just the importance. Also an editor changed it to Good Article and Top, but I reverted. Please provide an assesment :). <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 02:52, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
There is a request for comment at Faith (Buffy the Vampire Slayer), regarding the inclusion of the characters surname in the lead sentence. More opinions are needed. Please read the most recent discussion, Talk:Faith (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)#Name Redux, to understand why each side is opposing/supporting the inclusion of the name in the lead. Thank you. 11:19, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Recently I've noticed lists of taglines popping up on TV articles, just below the intro; see Nip/Tuck for what I'm talking about. Was this format conceived by WikiProject Television, and if so, where was that discussion held? If not, I would highly recommend they be removed on sight. It looks odd and isn't very encyclopedic to have them thrown in below the intro. - auburnpilot talk 01:28, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
...when {{ Infobox TV channel}}, {{ Infobox Radio station}}, {{ Infobox Broadcast}} and {{ Infobox Broadcasting network}} merges into one?-- JSH-alive (talk) (cntrbtns) (mail me) 12:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
I am looking for someone to offer opinions in a minor table color dispute between me and another editor. Any comment is helpful. And sorry if this is wrong place. :) <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 06:03, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
I recently made a post at Talk:Billi Bruno that I would like someone to see. Hallpriest9 ( Talk) 14:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I've recently had a problem at My Family after an IP address added a section called "Summary". I removed this as unnecessary, as its largely a repeat of information at List of My Family episodes, and any useful information is unsourced (when sourced would belong in the "Characters" section). After having problems with it being re-added back in, I contacted Collectonian, who removed it but was reverted soon after (see a discussion at her talk). Any help in this would be appreciated, as I'm getting no where!-- UpDown ( talk) 07:15, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I have added The O.C. task force under the umbrella of WikiProject Television. If anyone is interested in helping, please add your name to the list of members. Thanks Rambo's Revenge (talk) 23:38, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I have listed Sesame Street at Featured article review as I feel that is no longer Featured Article-class. You can leave your comments here. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 21:47, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
For a start I think these pages need to fall under this project. However, I'm thinking that they also need some overview work. There are multiple formats and I think a little standardising needs to be done (Obviously they can't all be the same, but some should be). Some combining needs to be done. I can't see the need for Syndication/primetime/etc but I'll accept that that's happened for reasons over time. I think that the "by episode count" page need only to be a column on the other pages. I think that there needs to be an international version of each list and where necessary a national version and a broadcast type version after that (if needed). The "by category" list I'm not happy with. I sort of get the point, but in reality it's a little "trivial". These are the lists I can find from the longest category, but there could be others, and the "see also" lists are fairly hap-hazard, I think they need some standardising too. Or perhaps a template or something. Finally, I think that a determination needs to be made about which page about how complete it is. Almost complete lists are fine, but others, ones that are obviously incomplete need a tag placed. Any thoughts/comments? Duggy 1138 ( talk) 13:55, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Dear WikiProject Television participants... WikiProject Media franchises needs some help from other projects which are similar. Media franchises scope deals primarily with the coordination of articles within the hundreds if not thousands of media franchises which exist. Sometimes a franchise might just need color coordination of the various templates used; it could mean creating an article for the franchise as a jump off point for the children of it; or the creation of a new templating system for media franchise articles. The project primarily focuses on those media franchises which are multimedia as not to step on the toes of this one. It would be great if some of this project's participants would come over and help us get back on solid footing. Please come and take a look at the project and see if you wish to lend a hand. Thank you. - LA ( T) 21:20, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Last night I stumbled on Masters of Horror after someone created an episode article for it using WP:COPYVIO material from IMDB. I redirected it to the episode list, only to discover one didn't exist. So, I spent a few hours creating an appropriate episode list, adding in the missing airdates and writers from a semi-list that had been in the main article. I then checked all of the other episode articles. All of them were simply plot summaries, some 800-900 words in length, and a few more copyvioed from IMDB. They all failed WP:EPISODE, WP:N, WP:WAF, WP:PLOT, and WP:MOSTV. As such, I redirected them all to the episode list. I also spent over an hour adding some actual real content to the main series page, though it isn't a series I'd ever heard of nor would ever watch myself (not a horror fan). I planned to spend some more time working on expanding the other sections, like reception, et al, as there are tons of references out there for this series.
Alas, another editor who hasn't done much editing in the last year, has suddenly jumped back online and began undoing many of the episode redirects. When I left a polite question on his talk page asking why, he when on a spreed of personal attacks on his talk page, an AfD for one episode, my talk page, and in his edit summaries. He has now began canvassing people to help "save" the episode articles [14] [15] [16] and started a discussion suggesting that the new List of Masters of Horror episodes be merged back into Masters of Horror under the premise that its split out somehow "harms" the article. Some addition a project eyes are needed, as well as additional opinions on the proposed merge Talk:Masters of Horror#Merge in episode list. -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 06:09, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Another editor has decided he agrees with Artw that the episode list should remain is a bad format in the main article instead of in the cleaned up format in a separate episode list per the WP:MOSTV. If no one else chimes in, this article will return to a crappy, useless state that has nothing but an episode list and DVD details because of their reverting. Please weigh in on the discussions going on. The article is now under full page protection because of the edit warring. -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 14:57, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
User:Colonel Warden has declared the episode list to be "a content fork which does not respect the contributions made under the GFDL by the editors who first started the list in the main article" (never mind it uses the summaries from the original list in the main article, it just fixed the format, added writer and airdate info, and a lead) and claims he is going to AfD it. Call me nuts, but when are episode lists suddenly BAD for TV articles? -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 20:08, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
I missed this... Matthewedwards ( talk • contribs • email) 22:38, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
They are Timeline of the 2007–2008 Writers Guild of America strike and Reaction by actors to the 2007-08 Writers Guild of America strike, just to let you know. Dalejenkins | 13:48, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I've listed The Daily Show for peer review because I'm really interested in bringing the article up to FA-quality. It was recently listed as a good article, thanks in large part to the fantastic feedback we got through the last PR, and I'd be delighted if anybody was able to offer some comments/critiques/suggestions on how it might be improved further. Thanks! - Shoemoney2night ( talk) 06:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I created a category for TV series with episodes in the public domain in their country of origin. Anybody wanna help? Retro Agnostic ( talk) 19:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Dear WikiProject Television participants... WikiProject Media franchises is currently discussing a naming convention for franchise articles. Since this may affect one or more articles in your project, we would like to get the opinions of all related projects before implimenting any sweeping changes. Please come and help us decide. Thanks! LA ( T) @ 22:16, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Pilot (House) has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
Howdy folks, would some of you mind looking at the The A-Team page and give some pointers/comments? Kusonaga ( talk) 16:16, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
If anyone is free, I'd be grateful if they could carry out a Peer Review on Mother and Child Reunion (Degrassi: The Next Generation). It was passed as a Good Article today and I'd like to take it to FAC. I am a little concerned about the Plot section though. WP:MOSTV says "As a rough guide, summaries for episode articles should be about 200 to 500 words. Complicated plots may take more space to present than simpler plots." This is an article about two episodes so the plot has been split into two parts. The word count for Part 1 is 653, and the count for Part 2 is 453, making a total of 1106. If anyone has any suggestions of how to lower the word count, especially for Part 1, while still making it understandable, that'd be great. Wikipedia:Peer review/Mother and Child Reunion (Degrassi: The Next Generation)/archive1. Thank you, Matthewedwards ( talk • contribs • email) 22:23, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
There appears to be a discrepancy between two WikiProject Television templates on Kid Nation. The talk page has a template with no rating or assigned level of importance. The article itself does. Thanks. Barte ( talk) 18:09, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Template:Infobox kdrama has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. JSH-alive (talk) (cntrbtns) (mail me) 03:51, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Based on several FACs, there seems to be support for a new NFC guideline which will primary effect episode pages, specifically: Non-free images used in infoboxes should be limited to those that "officially" represent the topic's material, such as front covers of books, albums, and video games, movie posters, and television show title cards.
The point here is that the infobox is meant to capture the critical, unquestionable details of the show, and thus only official imagery be used. For most articles, this doesn't affect it but does affect television episodes because the current practice of placing a screenshot from somewhere in the episode in the title box would need to be changed. Basically, as it is now, there are two problems with this approach:
That said, this is not a witch hunt to get all show images off episode articles; what will simply happen is that the image moves from the infobox to the text body in a location appropriate to match where it is talked about. I know some episodes actually have official promotional material (like the Simpsons) so these can stay.
I can think of no other project that would be as dramatically affected by this change, so I seek any input to make sure this is acceptable. -- MASEM 13:06, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
The merge of {{ Infobox TV channel}}, {{ Infobox Radio station}}, {{ Infobox Broadcast}} and {{ Infobox Broadcasting network}} is suggested. Click here to discuss. -- JSH-alive (talk) (cntrbtns) (mail me) 12:13, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
There is currently a CfR discussion taking place regarding the names of four categories here that needs some fresh eyes. Category names are not explicitly covered by the television naming convention, so your ideas are welcomed. LA ( T) @ 01:27, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion on whether WP:APPRENTICE should be expnded from being UK-focused to worldwide-focused. If anyone wants to join the WikiProject they can, and you can join in on the discussion here. Dalejenkins | 13:57, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I've recently been working on Homer's article and I would like some feed back on it. At the moment, I'm not worried about copyediting, but any input relating to anything (especially stuff that could be added) is more than welcome. Thanks, Scorpion 0422 02:45, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader? (U.S. game show) for good article reassessment as I feel that it no longer meets the good article criteria. Feel free to leave comments on the talk page. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 13:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
There's an ongoing discussion regarding use of Hulu.com as external link in TV related articles. Those interested are requested to contribute their thoughts on the issue. LeaveSleaves ( talk) 16:43, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Your input on the notability of the Fringe (TV Series) pilot would be welcome in this AFD. Are all pilots notable or are there specific requirements to establish a pilot's notability? Dreadstar † 06:29, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Can we get some more views over at Talk:Pilot (Fringe)#External Links regarding the inclusion of a link to the Massive Dynamic game in the episode article. Two editors feel it does not belong in the episode article and adds no value, while a third feels it should be included because it enhances the viewing experience. -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 19:57, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
*sigh* And we now have a disagreement over the inclusion of a promotional image at Fringe (TV series), that was already removed from the pilot article. See Talk:Fringe (TV series)#Maybe slow down just a little bit. As Hexhand is displaying serious ownership issues and making lengthy personal attacks anytime I do anything on this article, I'm requesting that someone else from the project weight in and maybe volunteer to watch over this page. Its one of the few series pages to actually start in decent shape and I'd hoped to keep it and its related articles that way, but I'm tired of the nastiness he insists on throwing my way and am close to losing my temper with him. -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 17:15, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:31, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi. This may have been discussed (repeatedly !) before, but... are there any guidelines on notability criteria for non-fiction television - either individual programmes or series ? WP:FICT won't apply, so is it just the usual third-party/independent coverage per WP:N ? CultureDrone ( talk) 07:40, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
A discussion has been started on the WikiProject Media franchises talk page regarding this topic. Please come over and give your input. Thanks! LA ( T) @ 07:05, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
The West Wing has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
Could someone take a look at this and weigh in from a television perspective instead of the biased perspectives of both sides?
Talk:Manchester_United_TV#Requested_move
Thanks,
Krocheck (
talk)
03:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi everyone. Could I ask for some comments on an issue that seems to be a recurring theme in The Red Green Show - namely, which set of secondary/minor characters to include on the main article page? I've tried a couple of times to start discussion on things like this in Talk:The Red Green Show, but it seems there are so few people watching that article that nobody's really interested in discussing things there.
The current question I have is: Since the show is defined almost entirely by its characters, it seems appropriate to have at least the main characters described on the page. At one point, we had an attempt to list them all - at first on the main page, then splitting out the minor and unseen characters into their own article. (That was later deleted via AfD.) Recently, an anonymous user added a good description of Buzz Sherwood to the Secondary Characters section. Buzz only appeared in about the first six seasons of the show and was never part of any main plot segments (to my knowledge), so I reverted, reasoning that Buzz is a minor character and not a secondary. But it's a fuzzy line there, since other characters that ARE in that section (like Hap Shaughnessy) could also be considered minor. There's no real formula that works for this.
I'm afraid that if we start listing all the characters that might be considered secondary and/or minor, we'll end up back where we started, with a character-heavy article that needs splitting out and then deleting for lack of notability. I'm leaning more towards removing the secondary characters section entirely, but like I said, the show has almost all of its substance in its characters (like many comedy shows).
Would anyone care to comment, either here or on the article talk? Thanks. — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 18:28, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Good start. I don't know how much help I could personally be, as I have never heard of the show. I'm not sure how much this will help, but here a few search results: Google News and Google web. Be wary of the web search. Places like IMDb, TV.com, and other similar sites are not considered reliable. Whenever you find a web source, read their "about us" section and try and find out how they come across their facts and if they have any editorial oversight. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:58, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, I was just wondering if there was some interest in creating a taskforce for NCIS. I know many people like the show but its articles here need some work and I don't have the time to do it at the moment (I have enough time to check on things and such but I don't have multiple hours at a time to really concentrate on an article). So I thought I'd ask here if some people were willing to help, maybe even creating a new task force for it. Anyone interested? :-) So Why 12:22, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
I've done some looking around and not seen this specific topic addressed. I figured I'd start the snowball rolling into hell.
I see many requests to start the NameOfShow project. It might be interesting to see some basic ideas as to why a show might support a project of its own. I can't really support a project because it has some arbitrary number of pages on it already. I think with just a little effort I could come up with 45 pages related to Manimal and I really don't think we'll get many people agreeing that this really isn't warranted.
So my question is... What would warrant a television show to have a wikiproject of its own? Some ideas would involve
General question. open for comments. Lordandrei ( talk) 22:26, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | → | Archive 15 |
Proposals at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Desperate Housewives, Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#ER, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Law & Order, have all passed the threshold for work groups. Would the members of this project be interested in taking them on? John Carter ( talk) 18:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Actor Rock Hudson, playing character Adam Trenton, is asked to be logical and replies something like: "There's nothing logical about a 115-pound blond spending $2's worth of gas to drive a two-ton automobile 15 (?) miles to save 5 cents on a can of peas..." or something along those lines. Would appreciate the exact quote or suggestions where to ask. Thank you, Shir-El too 17:32, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Lost Our Lisa on Peer Review. Your comments would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Peer review/Lost Our Lisa/archive1. Cirt ( talk) 09:23, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
(Similar post at WT:FILMS) I've been wasting plenty of time at http://www.hulu.com recently, and I'm wondering: should a link be placed to a) full-length episodes that are on the site in articles on that particular episode, and/or b) the link to the official landing page of a TV series for those shows whose official sites do not currently stream full-length episodes (for example, http://www.hulu.com/the-riches)? I imagine it would certainly be a useful resource. Perhaps a template like "Name_of_show at Hulu" could be developed? Budding Journalist 22:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Your Template {{{
WikiProject Television}}
causes issues when ever there is needs-infobox=yes. It can been seen on these pages
Talk:Brothers and Sisters (1979 TV series) &
Talk:Kraft Television Theatre and possibly any other pages within the
Television articles without infoboxes category.
Peachey88 (
Talk Page |
Contribs)
12:30, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
A discussion has been started at Template talk:Infobox Television as to whether the flag icons belong in Television infoboxes and if they should be stripped. Since that is a relatively low traffic page, I thought a heads up here would be good before a decision is made by only a handful of people. AnmaFinotera ( talk) 13:31, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Anyone want to tackle cleaning up List of 2point4 children episodes and List of One Foot in the Grave episodes. I've tagged both needing expert attention including formatting to follow more standard episode list format (such as using episode list template, wikifying dates, etc), for needing a better lead (only one sentence), and needing references. They already has episode summaries, so I think if someone were willing to tackle that, they could be a potential featured list candidate relatively quickly. However, I've had previous dealings with the lists' primary editor, which were unpleasant to say the least. I'd rather not deal with him again, hence my asking someone else to volunteer. AnmaFinotera ( talk) 22:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
List of Degrassi: The Next Generation episodes, and each season of the show has been nominated for Featured Topic. If anyone wants to pop along to review and comment, the link is here: Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Seasons of Degrassi: The Next Generation. Cheers! -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 00:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Should this be renamed, deleted, merged or what? I see it just being a list of just about everything that isn't an article already. I'm leaning towards merge and/or delete. However, isn't a catch-all list a bit trivial and not necessary? If anything, it needs a bit of cleanup. I somehow don't think every person listed has importance. Plus, the whole list of Dr. Crane show callers seems a bit trivial. Plus the article has poor sourcing. RobJ1981 ( talk) 06:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
As a note, the project template can now properly handle FL class for featured lists, so please use FL instead of FA when a list passes through FLC. They also will be properly categorized in Category:FL-Class television articles. Additionally, a much needed fix was done to stop using the military history's class file, which resulted in all of our television articles also be categorized as being military history articles! Attention was called to the issue by their changing their class file, which broke our template. We now have our own class file so this shouldn't be a problem in the future. AnmaFinotera ( talk) 18:34, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
User:Robinepowell has been removing the series overview and DVD release information from the main Degrassi TNG episode list, and changing Canadian release dates on the various season pages, claiming that they are all wrong because TVShowsOnDVD.com says so. Three editors and I have all asked her to stop, we've tried discussing with her but she continues to basically say she's right "because she says so" and revert. The main list ended up being protected, though I felt she should have been blocked due to her violating 3RR. TVShowsOnDVD is great for American releases, but not always correct on Canadian. Still, she said the dates were wrong so we did check, as can be seen at Talk:List of Degrassi: The Next Generation episodes#Degrassi DVDs but she completely refuses to engage in discussion on the article talk page, only leaving barely civil messages on our user pages. Following the dispute resolution process, I'm leaving a message here for project input at the main talk page, and in the various season pages regarding her date changes and which source should be used, and if the series overview table should be removed (though silent consensus in our featured lists says it belongs). AnmaFinotera ( talk) 05:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Buffy the Vampire Slayer (TV series) has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 21:12, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I was hoping that some people here, especially those with experience of having seen/helped get episode lists to featured list status, to check this article out and see if they have any suggestions. I put up a peer review, but without much response. The PR did help the article, but I came here in hopes of getting help from those working on other episode list articles. - AMK152( Talk • Contributions • Send message) 22:23, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Hey there,
I've been inactive for while on Wikipedia, but i'd like to get active again. One of the reasons is I have a new job, as the head of IT for Channel North Television, a new regional television station in Whangarei, New Zealand.
As part of my position, I have access to and knowledge about all the key components of a television station, for production as well as broadcast. We have a decent budget, so we have a reasonably high-tech system.
I'm wondering if you guys would be interested in any photos or information on it. I'm sure I could get a few interesting shots. We have full broadcast automation, a complete studio with control room, microwave systems, fibre network stuff, and our office area. It could probably spice up quite a few articles.
If anyone is interested in getting me to take some photos i'd be happy to, and if anyone wants any information or wants me to improve any articles i'd be happy to do so.
If I don't reply for a while then send me an email from my userpage, i'm very forgetful.
Matt/TheFearow (Talk) 01:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
The Principal and the Pauper is up at WP:FAC, comments would be appreciated. FAC discussion page is here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Principal and the Pauper. Cirt ( talk) 15:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Highlander: The Series (season 1) is currently a FLC. Please feel free to leave comments at Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Highlander:_The_Series_(season_1). Your input will be much appreciated. Have a nice day, Rosenknospe ( talk) 08:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Is it the general feeling here that any show which has actually aired on major network television is notable. for example Bram & Alice, which someone has prodded. I deprodded it for discussion. I 'm not really qualified to work on this one, so I'm notifying the people here. DGG ( talk) 22:09, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, are you aware that the {{ WikiProject Television}} template puts articles into a non-existent category, " Category:Television articles with comments"? — Cheers, JackLee – talk– 14:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, thought I'd highlight the issue. I'll leave it to you guys working on this WikiProject to decide what to do with it. — Cheers, JackLee – talk– 15:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
The Xenophile sock is back and flooding Wikipedia with Xena articles and lists. The only good edits so far were to create season pages for Xena, which were desperately needed. However, they are in bad shape and need to be cleaned up, including proper formatting, lead expansion, image correction, referencing, and adjusting to transclude the episode lists into List of Xena: Warrior Princess episodes. They probably also need renaming. Could probably end up being 7 FLs and an FT if someone wants to tackle, and doesn't mind having to occasionally deal with the socks.
That's the list. When cleaned up, some of the redirected episode articles should probably be adjusted to redirect to the appropriate season pages. I have gone though and tagged all for their issues, removed the fan gushing (and believe me, it was gushing), and fixed the images. The cast sections needs to be converted from big tables to more useful prose, and the toher stuff still needs to be done. AnmaFinotera ( talk) 17:16, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
As an update, season 3 & 4 have also now been reformatted and updated to have the episode lists transcluded into the main list from those season pages. Still having trouble from the xenophile socks, but no one else seems to be caring all that much. :( AnmaFinotera ( talk) 00:42, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
We are trying to guage a final consensus as to whether flag icons should or should not be used in television infoboxes. If you have a view on this, please go HERE, and voice your support/opposition/neutrality. Thank you. Talk Islander 14:22, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
An anon IP has made a proposal at Template talk:Episode list#Please add a new field called "ProductionNotes" trying to get a new field added called "ProductionNotes" for shoving trivia and other such things into the episode summary table. Personally opposed, but be good if more project people read his proposal and offered their own thoughts as well. AnmaFinotera ( talk) 14:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Nick GAS Although, the entire Nick GAS schedule has been look the same since Finders Keepers left in 2006. but the main situation was Get the Picture been played 4 times in the afternoon hours on both EST & CST zones while Nick Arcade played twice during the early morning hours and it been 1-2pm ET on weekdays since April 2004 and on weekends since December 2004 but it have'nt been back in the morning hours since the weekend of September 4th, 2004. it will excepted to be replaced with ethier 1 of show is airing (Nickelodeon GUTS, Nick Arcade or Double Dare 2000) or 1 of any shows is not airing (Wild and Crazy Kids, Finders Keepers, Family Double Dare, Double Dare or Global GUTS) at 1-2pm ET, 4-5pm ET and 3-4am ET. it will affect the lineup.
Disney Channel Starting May 17th, Disney Channel is changing the entire schedule, is this true that Disney Channel chaning the whole lineup, soon? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.230.191.173 ( talk) 00:45, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I seriously think that WP needs a task force [or section thereof] devoted to television technologies and related broadcast engineering/operations. I have read many an article about such that have so many issues that any single-user revision to correct would require such large deletion and time spent working that it would likely be marked as vandalism. Redoing the pages elsewhere then moving them in as part of a task force or just working in place, quickly, with research pre-compiled through a series of discussions could prove very useful. -- tonsofpcs ( Talk) 03:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
My, what a big WikiProject you have! I was interested in starting up a Arrested Development taskforce that would have this project as its parent (perhaps the Comedy WikiProject would be another parent?). I wasn't sure if I needed permission or anything before I start up a proposal etc. Thanks, Joelster ( talk) 00:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Working mostly on and off (mostly off) on America's Test Kitchen. Couple questions...
Thanks! — Rob ( talk) 20:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi everybody, I've just written an article called Introduction to genetics, which tries to explain the important concepts in DNA, genes, and so on, in an absolutely non-technical way. I was wondering if any people with no background in science would have time to go through this article and find the pieces where it isn't quite clear enough or fails to explain things properly. Comments on its talkpage please. Tim Vickers ( talk) 18:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Is Wikproject Avatar a task force of Wikiproject Television, or is it it's own stand alone Wikiproject? The WP:TV page say were are, but the WP:AVATAR page does not. Some of us at Wikiproject Avatar would like this cleared up. Rau's Speak Page 17:27, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
{{WikiProject Television|class={{{class|}}}|avatar=yes|avatar-importance={{{importance|}}}}}, and then used AWB to substitute each transclusion of the template. I nominated at least five subpages for deletion (there are a lot of inactive subpages), and moved the rest. I also deleted some unnecessary redirects caused by the moves (like for the members page). In addition, I added the List, Category, and Template-Class categories for the project, etc. If anything is wrong, please tell me here or on my talk page. For now, everything is good, I hope. — Parent5446 ( t n e l) 02:41, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
It's one of those things where it doesn't exactly matter what we call it, but thinking of it as a task force helps people to think of the project with a flow. For a lack of better words.. -- Ned Scott 03:42, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Didn't see a place to put television-related AFDs, so Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of stock characters in comedy. Cheers. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 04:35, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
The various lists of programs broadcast by NBC, ABC, and CBS are nearly complete and de-redded. However, the DuMont program list remains mostly red. I assume the age of these shows hinders development on associated articles. Help with countering systemic bias on Wikipedia is greatly appreciated. Firsfron of Ronchester 00:33, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Could anyone review the article It Feels Like Magic? ( 4Kids' edit of Winx Club's vert first episode)
I wonder if that article is worth to stay on the English Wikipedia.-- JSH-alive (talk) (cntrbtns) (mail me) 08:15, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Anyone want to adopt the article for Celia (TV series). The creator asked for an assessment from the project on April 28th, which I provided. I offered lots of additional help and advice to get the article in line with our style guidelines, etc. After I nominated some other articles the creator had made for deletion, however, he went all nuts on me (and got himself blocked for a day for making a crude insult). I don't want to deal with such an immature person anymore. However, some comments he made in the AfDs has me concerned that he will undo all of the fixing up done on the article out of spite, so I'd like to ask someone else to consider taking this one on to their watch list. For the most part, its in okay shape, except the episode summaries are all too long (though better than the huge things they were), the cast/characters needs to be merged into one section, and the episode airdates are only years. Could also use more referencing, but mostly would just like someone to keep an eye on it to keep it from being reverted back to its previous state. -- Collectonian ( talk · contribs) 15:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
List of Last of the Summer Wine episodes is in dire need of some clean up. The show spans nearly 30 series (seasons). The episode listings are all in odd formats, not using {{ episode list}} and instead being tabled with the plot summary and "episode notes" beside the titles and air dates. The series overview box is in bad shape as well, and it could use some lead work. Anyone feel like tackling this large revamp? -- Collectonian ( talk · contribs) 08:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
See Talk:Smallville (TV series)#Merge all character lists for discussion. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 13:14, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
There is a proposal to add a field to the infobox for "panelists" for panel type shows. Feel free to come weigh in. -- Collectonian ( talk · contribs) 18:30, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I am currently on a GA improvement drive for Pride and Prejudice (1995 TV serial), which was a six-episode adaption of a novel, with quite a few important characters to build the story. This makes the article fall somewhere between the TV MOS and the film MOS and possibly a book MOS that I am not aware of. Having FA quality in mind, I have thought of three options to cover the characters:
I don't feel strongly about either option, but I figure it can't hurt to get some input before I settle on one. Maybe someone already has experience with something like this so that I don't have to reinvent the wheel. – sgeureka t• c 10:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Is the "Name of the Show" section really neccesary? I'd like some opinions. Yojimbo501 ( talk) 23:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#new_user_mass-editing_templates. If oyu can't find the thread, look at my diff -- Enric Naval ( talk) 18:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
This note is being placed on the talk pages for both the film project and the television project as the discussion will overlap their articles. Also, I am posting this on these projects discussion pages as there are too many articles involved to list these on each separate shows talk page.
Recently User:24.129.100.84 began adding [[Category:Films over xx hours long]] to the pages of various television serials and miniseries. I have removed these based on the fact that these categories have usually been reserved for films that have had a theatrical release. I cannot find this listed as a specific criteria so this is the first point to which I would like both projects to come to a consensus. Should TV programs be considered films for these categories?
Some made for TV films may fit this category as long as it is the official runtime, sans commercials, that we are basing this on. But to list television miniseries and serials as films is a misnomer. They are usually broadcast over multiple nights and have breaks which include closing and opening credits between the episodes.
A look at this users contributions page [13] will show how many TV programs and miniseris have had these categories added to them. Should a consensus be reached that these categories might apply then we will need to set some criteria for what does and what does not fit the wording of the categories. My thanks to you for your attention in this matter. MarnetteD | Talk 20:42, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I've been working on a rewrite of Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/How to write about television programs in my sandbox (see User:Bignole/Television MOS), in the hopes that the television community can have an official style guideline similar to the guideline that the film community has. From what I've seen, the current page (which is not a guideline) has been rather inactive, and I know that when I edit articles I generally look to the film guideline as its pretty applicable in most cases. I feel that we need our own official guideline for MOS (you can see the initial discussion over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television/How to write about television programs#Update).
I'm hoping to get some fresh eyes look over it, tighten prose, include links to relevant policies and guidelines that I may have missed, and question whatever is on the page that they disagree with. This will also help with the problems associated with WP:EPISODE. With this MOS, we can remove any style information from EPISODE and have it focus solely on being a notability guideline (if it continues to exist at all, but that's a different discussion). So please, share your thoughts on the sandbox talk page as it's easier to make changes to the information if the discussion is taking place on the same page. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 02:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
There's some anime TV series, like Gungrave (anime) and Mononoke (anime), that disambiguate by adding "(anime)" instead "(TV series)" as recommended by WP:TV-NAME. I think they should be moved (i.e. Gungrave (TV series), Mononoke (TV series)), the same way Justice League (animated series) and Gargoyles (animated series) have been moved. What do you think?-- Nohansen ( talk) 03:28, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
In my gnome-ish way, I've been working through the lists at Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/List of TV shows over the last several months. It's been a combination of removing articles from these lists that have infoboxes, redirecting redlinks where articles exist under different names, ensuring that the lists are correctly sorted between 'missing' and 'no infobox' - various tasks. When I started, the main project page showed that the effort was 16% complete, which wasn't accurate - by the time I'm through all the alphabetical lists, I suspect the true picture will reveal that this effort is more like 50% complete.
A couple of thoughts/questions, however. First, as I've been doing this, I've been following the instructions on the main project page to tag the talk pages for articles with the "needs television infobox" template where appropriate. It occurs to me that it might have been nice to come here when I started and post a note that I was doing this, as this category has now grown five-fold over the last few months - it's accurate, but it might come as a surprise to people engaged in WP:TV who focus on filling in the infobox gaps. So, apologies.
Second, it's also occurred to me today that it might actually have been better to have been tagging those talk pages with the "WP:Television" template and the needs infobox option, rather than just the template I was using. Before I keep going, or even think about going back to change the others when I'm done, I just wanted to check if the project thinks this would be valuable or if simply the "needs television infobox" template is enough. If you'd prefer the former, I'll proceed accordingly, and also change the instruction on the main project page.
Thanks, Mlaffs ( talk) 17:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
A request for comment has been made to determine if the Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) proposal has consensus. Since this project deals with many fictional topics, I am commenting here. Input on the proposal is welcome here. -- Pixelface ( talk) 01:17, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I'd be grateful if some editors would be willing to give me some feedback on Last of the Summer Wine. I still feel it is almost at FA but the editors who tipped the balance to oppose in the last FAC refused to elaborate on what they thought was wrong with the article beyond some vague and cursory comments. I've opened a peer review request at Wikipedia:Peer review/Last of the Summer Wine/archive3 if anyone is willing to review the article. Thanks and cheers! Redfarmer ( talk) 15:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
I see that a taskforce for The X-Files has recently been created and was wondering if the WikiProject Television template could be updated to enable tagging the relevant articles. I would have left this message at the template talkpage, but wasn't sure if there had even been consensus for the creation of the taskforce. -- Beloved Freak 19:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
The article is just a cluttered mess. I count at least three sections dedicated to trivia. Anyone want to help clean it up? RobJ1981 ( talk) 04:50, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey all. I have a rather specific request. Does anyone have a copy of Toons! The Animation Magazine #1? Toons was a short-lived Wizard spinoff from the late 1990s. The issue I'm looking for had a picture of Pikachu on the cover. I mainly want it because I think it might have some information on "Nazis on Tap", the "lost" Simpsons short. If anyone has a copy, or could let me know how to get one, I'd really appreciate it. Zagalejo ^^^ 06:27, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
This image has been vandalized: Image:Sleeping_Beauty.jpg. Can anyone put back the previous DVD cover image of the TV show and replace the image in the infobox for Sleeping Beauty (Faerie Tale Theatre episode)? Also, I think that article needs your project tag. Thanks! -- Ssilvers ( talk) 14:09, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
List of Avatar: The Last Airbender episodes has been nominated for the removal of its Featured list status. The discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of Avatar: The Last Airbender episodes. Regards, Matthewedwards ( talk • contribs • email) 01:21, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Note: This discussion should be merged with Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Television/Style_guidelines#MOS_proposal for an advertised, centralized discussion on Television-related style guidelines
I boldly offered
this edit to the infobox part of the project page:
old:
The general infobox for an actor is {{ Infobox actor}}. For voice actors use {{ Infobox actor voice}}.
new:
The general infobox for an actor is {{ Infobox actor}}. For voice actors use {{ Infobox actor voice}}. In general, it is best to list actors (and not the characters they portray) in a semblance of encyclopedic order, such as alphabetical.
This addresses the need to remove in-universe writing within the infobox as well as addressing the need for a less whimsical ordering of actors listed in the infobox. It is not a command, but a recognition of how it has generally been done throughout other projects. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 19:46, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
What is considered notable enough for Wikipedia? Is it:
Thanks. Matthewedwards ( talk • contribs • email) 06:53, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Can anyone check all Pages that link to the article Winx Club and if the link was added on some pages in the manner of vandalism or something, please remove it.-- JSH-alive (talk) (cntrbtns) (mail me) 07:45, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Currently, 2894 articles assigned to this project, or 29.5%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 18 June 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page. -- B. Wolterding ( talk) 11:50, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey all. There's a bit of an edit war going on at the Degrassi episodes. Seems like the pages for all the seasons have come under battle, but the main discussion is going on at Talk:List of Degrassi: The Next Generation episodes#Disagreement over episode numbers. The conflict is whether or not hour-long episodes should be considered as one or two episodes, given that they may have run that way in syndication. I'm only giving a third opinion on the page, but perhaps someone from this project could go over and add to the consensus. Thanks! — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 02:59, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.
Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot ( Disable) 21:24, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
This list is in seriously bad shape. Only one episode is using {{ episode}}, resulting in the pilot episode actually appearing at the bottom of the page. Guessing there is something messed up in the code. Its missing airdates, citations, and a lead. Summaries themselves seem okay, except the formatting, so could possibly be cleaned up fairly quick and put into good shape if someone wants to give it a whirl. -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 11:55, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
This is a continuation of Wikipedia talk:Television episodes/Archive 4#Multiple episodes/story arcs and how to deal with them. Seeing as the point I made there is the same point I want to make now:
We need a process for articles on episodes with multiple parts. So far, we have four types of these articles, with examples:
*** One article Multiple articles Episodes with the same name Exodus (Lost) Differently-named episodes in a distinct story arc. Stewie Griffin: The Untold Story As you can see, there is a level of inconsistency here, thus there are two questions to be asked:
- Do episodes with similar titles that air in succession warrant their own articles, or a summary article?
- Do episodes in a distinct story arc warrant their own articles or a summary article, if the arc has a common name? [such as An Unearthly Child or Stewie Griffin
- If the arc does not have a common name, should there be a summary article or seperate articles?
Thoughts to the original two questions? The previous discussion whimpered out with no result, so I've brought it here for a wider audience. Sceptre ( talk) 13:12, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
An important discussion on " Should WikiProjects get prior approval of other WikiProjects (Descendant or Related or any ) to tag articles that overlaps their scope ? " is open here . We welcome you to participate and give your valuable opinions. -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - , member of WikiProject Council. 14:38, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I was looking around, but could not find a template appropriate for usage in television documentary articles. Anyone know where I can find one? - Hexhand ( talk) 11:01, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
(see previous discussion for background information)
I have created the Broadcast Engineering and Technology Taskforce under WikiProject: Television. If you are interested, please join and begin discussion of technical issues. -- tonsofpcs ( Talk) 18:09, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I recently uploaded three images for use in the documentary article, The Gunpowder Plot: Exploding The Legend::
I would like to make sure the image rationale/summary is durable. Could someone with experience in this area take a look and offer some feedback? - Hexhand ( talk) 01:02, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I've initiated discussion at
WT:FILM#Renaming of filming terms about renaming articles about film terminology to be properly disambiguated. I noticed that WP:TV disambiguates with (television)
, while WP:FILM can't quite do that with (film)
, since it is reserved for individual film articles. At this point, it seems likely that we will move to (film terminology)
, but I wanted to make sure that we avoided any possible issues. In this case, there may be some overlap between film and television in the terminology like
Split screen (film). Do editors at WP:TV have any suggestions on how to address this kind of overlap? We'll keep it separate if possible, but with exceptions like the aforementioned example, we should have an alternative solution. (Note: Looks like WP:TV has
Category:Television terminology; WP:FILM may try to make a similar category in
Category:Film terminology, so we can mention both categories in any kind of overlap.) Please comment at the discussion link! :) —
Erik (
talk •
contrib) -
17:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
I've worked up a potential guideline on how to write plot summaries at Wikipedia:How to write a plot summary. I welcome input from members of this project as I try to move the page to guideline status. Thanks. Phil Sandifer ( talk) 21:03, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Comments appreciated at Wikipedia:Peer review/Jason Beghe/archive1. Cirt ( talk) 21:09, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
I was referred to this page to find a few other editors who can help. We need help improving The Partridge Family article. Much of it is pretty well written, but it currently lacks in-line citations and could use more sources to verify it's content. We do NOT need editors who want to do drive-by tagging and commit forms of sabatoge. Lord knows we have had our share of smarty-pants who just want to be bossy and tell you whats wrong with the article without actually doing any of the work. So if you have a heart and want to work WITH other people with a cooperative spirit to improve an article about this wonderful TV show, which I personally hold close to my heart PLEASE drop by the discussion page and say Hi. We want to make this article perfect! Thank you! ShirleyPartridge ( talk) 21:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
I Love Money was assesed as High Importance and Start Quality. I don't have a problem with Start quality, just the importance. Also an editor changed it to Good Article and Top, but I reverted. Please provide an assesment :). <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 02:52, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
There is a request for comment at Faith (Buffy the Vampire Slayer), regarding the inclusion of the characters surname in the lead sentence. More opinions are needed. Please read the most recent discussion, Talk:Faith (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)#Name Redux, to understand why each side is opposing/supporting the inclusion of the name in the lead. Thank you. 11:19, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Recently I've noticed lists of taglines popping up on TV articles, just below the intro; see Nip/Tuck for what I'm talking about. Was this format conceived by WikiProject Television, and if so, where was that discussion held? If not, I would highly recommend they be removed on sight. It looks odd and isn't very encyclopedic to have them thrown in below the intro. - auburnpilot talk 01:28, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
...when {{ Infobox TV channel}}, {{ Infobox Radio station}}, {{ Infobox Broadcast}} and {{ Infobox Broadcasting network}} merges into one?-- JSH-alive (talk) (cntrbtns) (mail me) 12:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
I am looking for someone to offer opinions in a minor table color dispute between me and another editor. Any comment is helpful. And sorry if this is wrong place. :) <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 06:03, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
I recently made a post at Talk:Billi Bruno that I would like someone to see. Hallpriest9 ( Talk) 14:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I've recently had a problem at My Family after an IP address added a section called "Summary". I removed this as unnecessary, as its largely a repeat of information at List of My Family episodes, and any useful information is unsourced (when sourced would belong in the "Characters" section). After having problems with it being re-added back in, I contacted Collectonian, who removed it but was reverted soon after (see a discussion at her talk). Any help in this would be appreciated, as I'm getting no where!-- UpDown ( talk) 07:15, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I have added The O.C. task force under the umbrella of WikiProject Television. If anyone is interested in helping, please add your name to the list of members. Thanks Rambo's Revenge (talk) 23:38, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I have listed Sesame Street at Featured article review as I feel that is no longer Featured Article-class. You can leave your comments here. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 21:47, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
For a start I think these pages need to fall under this project. However, I'm thinking that they also need some overview work. There are multiple formats and I think a little standardising needs to be done (Obviously they can't all be the same, but some should be). Some combining needs to be done. I can't see the need for Syndication/primetime/etc but I'll accept that that's happened for reasons over time. I think that the "by episode count" page need only to be a column on the other pages. I think that there needs to be an international version of each list and where necessary a national version and a broadcast type version after that (if needed). The "by category" list I'm not happy with. I sort of get the point, but in reality it's a little "trivial". These are the lists I can find from the longest category, but there could be others, and the "see also" lists are fairly hap-hazard, I think they need some standardising too. Or perhaps a template or something. Finally, I think that a determination needs to be made about which page about how complete it is. Almost complete lists are fine, but others, ones that are obviously incomplete need a tag placed. Any thoughts/comments? Duggy 1138 ( talk) 13:55, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Dear WikiProject Television participants... WikiProject Media franchises needs some help from other projects which are similar. Media franchises scope deals primarily with the coordination of articles within the hundreds if not thousands of media franchises which exist. Sometimes a franchise might just need color coordination of the various templates used; it could mean creating an article for the franchise as a jump off point for the children of it; or the creation of a new templating system for media franchise articles. The project primarily focuses on those media franchises which are multimedia as not to step on the toes of this one. It would be great if some of this project's participants would come over and help us get back on solid footing. Please come and take a look at the project and see if you wish to lend a hand. Thank you. - LA ( T) 21:20, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Last night I stumbled on Masters of Horror after someone created an episode article for it using WP:COPYVIO material from IMDB. I redirected it to the episode list, only to discover one didn't exist. So, I spent a few hours creating an appropriate episode list, adding in the missing airdates and writers from a semi-list that had been in the main article. I then checked all of the other episode articles. All of them were simply plot summaries, some 800-900 words in length, and a few more copyvioed from IMDB. They all failed WP:EPISODE, WP:N, WP:WAF, WP:PLOT, and WP:MOSTV. As such, I redirected them all to the episode list. I also spent over an hour adding some actual real content to the main series page, though it isn't a series I'd ever heard of nor would ever watch myself (not a horror fan). I planned to spend some more time working on expanding the other sections, like reception, et al, as there are tons of references out there for this series.
Alas, another editor who hasn't done much editing in the last year, has suddenly jumped back online and began undoing many of the episode redirects. When I left a polite question on his talk page asking why, he when on a spreed of personal attacks on his talk page, an AfD for one episode, my talk page, and in his edit summaries. He has now began canvassing people to help "save" the episode articles [14] [15] [16] and started a discussion suggesting that the new List of Masters of Horror episodes be merged back into Masters of Horror under the premise that its split out somehow "harms" the article. Some addition a project eyes are needed, as well as additional opinions on the proposed merge Talk:Masters of Horror#Merge in episode list. -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 06:09, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Another editor has decided he agrees with Artw that the episode list should remain is a bad format in the main article instead of in the cleaned up format in a separate episode list per the WP:MOSTV. If no one else chimes in, this article will return to a crappy, useless state that has nothing but an episode list and DVD details because of their reverting. Please weigh in on the discussions going on. The article is now under full page protection because of the edit warring. -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 14:57, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
User:Colonel Warden has declared the episode list to be "a content fork which does not respect the contributions made under the GFDL by the editors who first started the list in the main article" (never mind it uses the summaries from the original list in the main article, it just fixed the format, added writer and airdate info, and a lead) and claims he is going to AfD it. Call me nuts, but when are episode lists suddenly BAD for TV articles? -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 20:08, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
I missed this... Matthewedwards ( talk • contribs • email) 22:38, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
They are Timeline of the 2007–2008 Writers Guild of America strike and Reaction by actors to the 2007-08 Writers Guild of America strike, just to let you know. Dalejenkins | 13:48, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I've listed The Daily Show for peer review because I'm really interested in bringing the article up to FA-quality. It was recently listed as a good article, thanks in large part to the fantastic feedback we got through the last PR, and I'd be delighted if anybody was able to offer some comments/critiques/suggestions on how it might be improved further. Thanks! - Shoemoney2night ( talk) 06:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I created a category for TV series with episodes in the public domain in their country of origin. Anybody wanna help? Retro Agnostic ( talk) 19:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Dear WikiProject Television participants... WikiProject Media franchises is currently discussing a naming convention for franchise articles. Since this may affect one or more articles in your project, we would like to get the opinions of all related projects before implimenting any sweeping changes. Please come and help us decide. Thanks! LA ( T) @ 22:16, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Pilot (House) has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
Howdy folks, would some of you mind looking at the The A-Team page and give some pointers/comments? Kusonaga ( talk) 16:16, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
If anyone is free, I'd be grateful if they could carry out a Peer Review on Mother and Child Reunion (Degrassi: The Next Generation). It was passed as a Good Article today and I'd like to take it to FAC. I am a little concerned about the Plot section though. WP:MOSTV says "As a rough guide, summaries for episode articles should be about 200 to 500 words. Complicated plots may take more space to present than simpler plots." This is an article about two episodes so the plot has been split into two parts. The word count for Part 1 is 653, and the count for Part 2 is 453, making a total of 1106. If anyone has any suggestions of how to lower the word count, especially for Part 1, while still making it understandable, that'd be great. Wikipedia:Peer review/Mother and Child Reunion (Degrassi: The Next Generation)/archive1. Thank you, Matthewedwards ( talk • contribs • email) 22:23, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
There appears to be a discrepancy between two WikiProject Television templates on Kid Nation. The talk page has a template with no rating or assigned level of importance. The article itself does. Thanks. Barte ( talk) 18:09, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Template:Infobox kdrama has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. JSH-alive (talk) (cntrbtns) (mail me) 03:51, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Based on several FACs, there seems to be support for a new NFC guideline which will primary effect episode pages, specifically: Non-free images used in infoboxes should be limited to those that "officially" represent the topic's material, such as front covers of books, albums, and video games, movie posters, and television show title cards.
The point here is that the infobox is meant to capture the critical, unquestionable details of the show, and thus only official imagery be used. For most articles, this doesn't affect it but does affect television episodes because the current practice of placing a screenshot from somewhere in the episode in the title box would need to be changed. Basically, as it is now, there are two problems with this approach:
That said, this is not a witch hunt to get all show images off episode articles; what will simply happen is that the image moves from the infobox to the text body in a location appropriate to match where it is talked about. I know some episodes actually have official promotional material (like the Simpsons) so these can stay.
I can think of no other project that would be as dramatically affected by this change, so I seek any input to make sure this is acceptable. -- MASEM 13:06, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
The merge of {{ Infobox TV channel}}, {{ Infobox Radio station}}, {{ Infobox Broadcast}} and {{ Infobox Broadcasting network}} is suggested. Click here to discuss. -- JSH-alive (talk) (cntrbtns) (mail me) 12:13, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
There is currently a CfR discussion taking place regarding the names of four categories here that needs some fresh eyes. Category names are not explicitly covered by the television naming convention, so your ideas are welcomed. LA ( T) @ 01:27, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion on whether WP:APPRENTICE should be expnded from being UK-focused to worldwide-focused. If anyone wants to join the WikiProject they can, and you can join in on the discussion here. Dalejenkins | 13:57, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I've recently been working on Homer's article and I would like some feed back on it. At the moment, I'm not worried about copyediting, but any input relating to anything (especially stuff that could be added) is more than welcome. Thanks, Scorpion 0422 02:45, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader? (U.S. game show) for good article reassessment as I feel that it no longer meets the good article criteria. Feel free to leave comments on the talk page. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 13:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
There's an ongoing discussion regarding use of Hulu.com as external link in TV related articles. Those interested are requested to contribute their thoughts on the issue. LeaveSleaves ( talk) 16:43, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Your input on the notability of the Fringe (TV Series) pilot would be welcome in this AFD. Are all pilots notable or are there specific requirements to establish a pilot's notability? Dreadstar † 06:29, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Can we get some more views over at Talk:Pilot (Fringe)#External Links regarding the inclusion of a link to the Massive Dynamic game in the episode article. Two editors feel it does not belong in the episode article and adds no value, while a third feels it should be included because it enhances the viewing experience. -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 19:57, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
*sigh* And we now have a disagreement over the inclusion of a promotional image at Fringe (TV series), that was already removed from the pilot article. See Talk:Fringe (TV series)#Maybe slow down just a little bit. As Hexhand is displaying serious ownership issues and making lengthy personal attacks anytime I do anything on this article, I'm requesting that someone else from the project weight in and maybe volunteer to watch over this page. Its one of the few series pages to actually start in decent shape and I'd hoped to keep it and its related articles that way, but I'm tired of the nastiness he insists on throwing my way and am close to losing my temper with him. -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 17:15, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:31, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi. This may have been discussed (repeatedly !) before, but... are there any guidelines on notability criteria for non-fiction television - either individual programmes or series ? WP:FICT won't apply, so is it just the usual third-party/independent coverage per WP:N ? CultureDrone ( talk) 07:40, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
A discussion has been started on the WikiProject Media franchises talk page regarding this topic. Please come over and give your input. Thanks! LA ( T) @ 07:05, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
The West Wing has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
Could someone take a look at this and weigh in from a television perspective instead of the biased perspectives of both sides?
Talk:Manchester_United_TV#Requested_move
Thanks,
Krocheck (
talk)
03:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi everyone. Could I ask for some comments on an issue that seems to be a recurring theme in The Red Green Show - namely, which set of secondary/minor characters to include on the main article page? I've tried a couple of times to start discussion on things like this in Talk:The Red Green Show, but it seems there are so few people watching that article that nobody's really interested in discussing things there.
The current question I have is: Since the show is defined almost entirely by its characters, it seems appropriate to have at least the main characters described on the page. At one point, we had an attempt to list them all - at first on the main page, then splitting out the minor and unseen characters into their own article. (That was later deleted via AfD.) Recently, an anonymous user added a good description of Buzz Sherwood to the Secondary Characters section. Buzz only appeared in about the first six seasons of the show and was never part of any main plot segments (to my knowledge), so I reverted, reasoning that Buzz is a minor character and not a secondary. But it's a fuzzy line there, since other characters that ARE in that section (like Hap Shaughnessy) could also be considered minor. There's no real formula that works for this.
I'm afraid that if we start listing all the characters that might be considered secondary and/or minor, we'll end up back where we started, with a character-heavy article that needs splitting out and then deleting for lack of notability. I'm leaning more towards removing the secondary characters section entirely, but like I said, the show has almost all of its substance in its characters (like many comedy shows).
Would anyone care to comment, either here or on the article talk? Thanks. — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 18:28, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Good start. I don't know how much help I could personally be, as I have never heard of the show. I'm not sure how much this will help, but here a few search results: Google News and Google web. Be wary of the web search. Places like IMDb, TV.com, and other similar sites are not considered reliable. Whenever you find a web source, read their "about us" section and try and find out how they come across their facts and if they have any editorial oversight. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:58, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, I was just wondering if there was some interest in creating a taskforce for NCIS. I know many people like the show but its articles here need some work and I don't have the time to do it at the moment (I have enough time to check on things and such but I don't have multiple hours at a time to really concentrate on an article). So I thought I'd ask here if some people were willing to help, maybe even creating a new task force for it. Anyone interested? :-) So Why 12:22, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
I've done some looking around and not seen this specific topic addressed. I figured I'd start the snowball rolling into hell.
I see many requests to start the NameOfShow project. It might be interesting to see some basic ideas as to why a show might support a project of its own. I can't really support a project because it has some arbitrary number of pages on it already. I think with just a little effort I could come up with 45 pages related to Manimal and I really don't think we'll get many people agreeing that this really isn't warranted.
So my question is... What would warrant a television show to have a wikiproject of its own? Some ideas would involve
General question. open for comments. Lordandrei ( talk) 22:26, 28 September 2008 (UTC)