![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
![]() Archives |
---|
Old WP:TVE:
Old WP:LOE:
|
Wikipedia:WikiProject List of Television Episodes/structure needs to be updated a bit and cleaned up to reflect the formatting currently being used by the templates and such. I've started to edit some stuff, trying to stick with things that I think you'll all agree with. Feel free to revert, edit, reword, anything you don't think sounds right. Any major concerns should be brought to ether this talk page or to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject List of Television Episodes/structure. I think it's important that we still explain the article layout even without using templates. For one, it shows people what the templates are actually doing, in raw form, as well as giving editors a non-template option, if there be a need for it. In addition, I think we should strive to eventually get this, or something like this, into the Manual of Style as an official guideline, in which case we would have to explain all the formatting details.
In addition to the changes I made, there should also be a section about references, which is one requirement for Featured list status. I also think we should come up with some guidelines to help deal with lists that are embedded into their main articles and not big enough to split. Maybe even explore other formatting appearances that would still be acceptable, to give some additional options.
This should at least get the ball rolling. I think it might be a good idea to inform some other wikiprojects about the updates to get their input, since our membership is still pretty small. -- Ned Scott 02:40, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
I just noticed how nice the cell shading was done for the row that contains title and air date in The Simpsons season 4. It really helps to visually separate the information and makes it easier to read. Maybe we should apply this to our style guidelines and templates? -- Ned Scott 20:07, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
I think we should strive to keep the same names for the parameters of the templates where possible. Also we should probably make some comments on things like "Guest stars, directors, writers etc.". Personally i prefer the way Grey's Anatomy and Simpsons Season 4 do this. It's much more readable then having it in seperate columns. - TheDJ ( talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 22:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi, one of your project's leaders made a comment on the page List of Stargate SG-1 episodes. I would just like to say that I have responded and made a proposal that I think you will like. Please respond on the SG-1 list's talk page; we should keep the thread in one place. Tobyk777 08:07, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
I was thinking we should evaluate the categories we have right now and see if there's any possible restructering / renaming / etc. Also, we should probably note a bit more as some form of guideline, even just a short one on the main project page, about how to select the appropate category. Here's a list of our current categories:
and there you have it. If anyone hasn't already done so, be sure to read / skim through Wikipedia:Categorization when coming up with suggestions and ideas. -- Ned Scott 09:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Fair use/Fair use images in lists for a request for comment about the use of fair use images in lists. This RFC arose out of a dispute about the use of images on list of Lost episodes and has grown beyond that article to have broader significance for lists generally. Please join the discussion if you are interested in this issue. -- bainer ( talk) 05:03, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
At List of Justice League episodes,we have an editor who wants to split all of the episodes off at once into their own articles. Unfortunately for him, the majority of editors has asked him not to create so many stubs at once, saying that the current page should be expanded before we go to individual episodes. Despite several Wikipedia bans over the last month, this editor refuses to listen, is uncivil toward the editors who do not agree with him, and continuously splits of articles and reverts the current one dispute consensus being against it. He is now seeking support at a number of other TV articles. This has gone on far too long. I have asked as a compromise that he add the information he wants to add to the current article so that it will expand enough to split off. I would appreciate it if editors from here came and provided some guidance one way or the other because I have never seen one editor rage against a number of other editors and revert their edits for so long.-- Chris Griswold 06:50, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
I've placed a notice using {{ WikiProject LOE}} in regards to the current RFC about fair use images in Lists of episodes. Normally I'd be against using a WikiProject banner for posting this type of notice, but I feel the issue is very important to our WikiProject, and will effect many articles that we are involved with. For the sake of informing other editors, this seemed to be a good idea. The message can easily be removed, and is very efficient in informing many effected articles and editors with little effort. I don't think this is something we should make a habit of, in any case, but feel this is a special case. -- Ned Scott 04:14, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Please tell me if this is not the right place to being this up:
I like the boxes at the top of some episode lists such as List of The Simpsons episodes, since they are a summary that links you to the appropriate season and provide some extra information about DVD releases on the same page. Having DVD release dates and cover art there isn't entirely necessary in my opinion but that's a minor quibble, it doesn't take up much room to have that there.
What I am against is the massive expansion of this on some pages to have a great long explanation of which episodes are on which DVD sets, such as the pages on Family Guy, the word "summary" has actually been changed to "DVD releases" because there's so much DVD info there, plus the information in this cases is not presented very well anyway. Some shows (including Family Guy) have their own pages for discussing DVD information, and in my opinion even if there isn't it should go on the article's main page. Can I confirm that it's not good practice to have a summary box like this? It's an episode list after all, not a list of DVDs. I thought I'd seen a couple of other pages where there was a lot of DVD stuff in the sumary box but I can't put my finger on them now Jimbow25 18:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi. I've done some refactoring work on your Project's categories and templates today (along with several other WikiProjects). I'm confident you'll find that the new organisation a big improvement. For more information and a rationale please see what I've written at Wikipedia:WikiProject/Best_practices#Categorisation or drop me a line on my talk page.
If you're not yet assessing articles for Wikipedia 1.0 and using Mathbot, you might also find Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index of subjects and it's talk page very useful. -- kingboyk 17:21, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Currently we've been formatting episodes by air date, but I noticed that List of Justice League episodes does it by title/ story. Basically, instead of splitting the entries by Part one, part two, etc, they did that. Depending on the nature of the show, and maybe some other factors, I can see this as a good idea. What does everyone think? -- Ned Scott 20:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
I made the background of the ShortSummary cell white, to help the tables not look so dark. This has also made more contrast between the shading of the Title row. Thoughts? good? bad? -- Ned Scott 20:10, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure why this hasn't been included in either of the templates, but I've included the ability to set a caption that will appear as tooltip on the images. -- TheFarix ( Talk) 17:38, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Just noticed this now, but apparently there's been some discussion about Wikipedia:List guideline (see Wikipedia talk:List guideline) about reforming the basic guidelines for lists and list articles. A proposal has come out of that discussion, Wikipedia:List guidelines reborn and will be discussed on Wikipedia talk:List guidelines reborn. I haven't looked at it in depth myself yet, but I thought I'd pass the word. -- Ned Scott 05:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
The episode list for this is severely lacking. Could the members here please lavish some care onto it? Ta. -- Jamdav86 20:50, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Has red links to many the episodes, flip-flops between disambigs and part listings, all jobs that are relevant to the list editor. -- Jamdav86 18:33, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
TrackerTV has created a barnstar proposal relating to Broadcasting. I would really appreciate it if interested people could give an opinion here.-- Ed 20:58, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
People are taking consensus against the conventions in this page. Votes are needed to keep the work up in that page. These people (I think most of them don't even get any work done on the article, just criticize) don't want neither expand the synopsis on the episode list nor create articles per episode and it happens in most cases. -- T-man, the wise 06:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Just thought I'd note here that we're playing around the ability to link to specific episode entries, same way the # article-section links work, at Template talk:Episode list#Page anchors. We're also looking to make the optional parameters more efficient and solving the problem of what to do when you have an optional parameter that isn't filled out at Template talk:Episode list#Empty Cells. -- Ned Scott 05:47, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Hello, Could you please add your opinion (or voice your support or a opposition) at this page.
It could decide the fate of colours in not only episode infoboxes but, nav boxes, celeb boxes.. (The bars in between episodes guides..) etc. MatthewFenton ( talk • contribs) 10:46, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
and other great stuff. I'm a bit tired right now, so sorry if my message seems a bit sloppy tonight.
The problem of, say, having Aux1 for director, but then having an episode where it wasn't filled out would result in the cells shifting over. This is no longer a problem. Instead of the parameter being filled out being the trigger for the cell, now wether or not the parameter is listed in the template triggers the cell. Also, the colored line divider should now be IE compatible. And there's no more need for a "non image" template, any episode list that doesn't wish to use images (and wishes thus to not have a column for images) simply needs to remove the |Image=
parameter from the template listing (the reverse of the above). Lists that don't wish to have images or summaries, and thus don't need a color divider only need to remove both |ShortSummary=
and |Image=
. Been reading up about templates and it finally hit me on how to fix those issues.
These fixes are not live yet, they are only on my sandbox page. All of the episode lists (about 100 or so) need to be updated via bot (I can run mine) to remove unused parameters from being listed. The side effect of this fix is, if you don't have a column for "alt date" but you use |AltDate=
then a cell will be created for Alt date. The bot will check for and remove such parameters which aren't being used (with a human inspecting each of the final results). Oh, and the Japanese episode list template will also be merged, but still keeping it's custom foreign title parameters (they'll just be equal to Title and AltTitle, etc).
The new template code that I've been playing around with is at User:Ned Scott/sandbox and examples can be seen at User:Ned Scott/sandbox2 (be sure to look at the page in the edit view to see what I mean).
Still have some more tweaks, and then run the bot through, which should actually be a simple process. But I do want some other people to look at it incase I missed anything (which I probably did, like I said, I'm a bit tired right now :) ) and give their inputs and such. Also, be sure to look at the examples in other web browsers and see if you can spot any compatibility issues. Again, any input, feedback, whatever is welcome. -- Ned Scott 09:38, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
|EpisodeNumber= |EpisodeNumber2= |ProdCode= |Title= |AltTitle= |Aux1= |Aux2= |OriginalAirDate= |AltDate= |Image= |ImageSize= |ImageCaption= |ShortSummary= |LineColor= |TopColor=
Example of minimal parameter use:
|EpisodeNumber= |Title= |OriginalAirDate=
Tyipical use:
|EpisodeNumber= |Title= |OriginalAirDate= |Image= |ShortSummary=
So to keep the instructions simple, I think the basic parameters should be introduced first, then show the extra options such as the colors, sizes, aux cells, etc. Oh yeah, and there's now |TopColor=
so people can change the shading of the title row if they want, like what is seen on
The Simpsons (season 2). --
Ned Scott 09:56, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
{{ Episode list (no image)}} now redirects to {{ Episode list}}, which has been updated using the sandbox template (with some more updates). Everything seems to work, but the line color divider looked really.. bad.. with some of the lighter colors. I changed it back to using the old line divider to the time being, not sure if we should find another way or just update the articles with light colors. I updated all the articles that used unused parameters, and there seemed to be no major issues. Most won't even notice a difference :)
Also, when there is no |Image=, the template swings around the episode number to the left hand side as it did with {{ Episode list (no image)}}, but in doing so now |TopColor= or it's default (or a manual entry of color for that first row) won't work at all when it is in a no-image state. As you can see from the edit history, it was driving me nuts last night, and I still can't seem to find the issue. The template is a bit hard to follow right now, it's not all nicely indented and such, but you should be able to see what I mean. And I still haven't figured out why using the # sign in a parameter messes it up (an old problem), which prevents us from using spelled out color values such as "blue" (as it would result in bgcolor="#blue" instead of ="blue"). If you are wondering why it has an if-statement for that color, it's so that lists without summaries or images can be presented without color options or a color line (a "simple" mode, of sorts).
Instructions have been updated a little bit, but in general could probably be updated to be more easier to follow. So that's where I'm at. I haven't gone through the articles that use unused parameters for {{ Japanese episode list}} yet, so they're still using the old template. When it's all said and done they'll all be using one template, while still being able to use specific parameters when there is a large demand for them. -- Ned Scott 19:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
moved from #/structure
It's probably best not to continue the dispute here. When you are asking for comments it's best just to give a brief neutral summary of the dispute and then link to the discussion and leave it at that. (Also, I couldn't help but notice you two yelling "POV" at each other. POV in a discussion is not an issue in Wikipedia, that's the whole point of giving one's opinion or thoughts on an issue. The neutral point of view policy is only about how we write article text, not about discussions and comments... In other words POV is ok on the talk page because you're in a discussion. ) -- Ned Scott 01:54, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Am I right in saying that listings of shows having aired on a particular programming block as: S.C.I.F.I. World and Cartoon Quest for the Sci Fi Channel, would not be covered by this WikiProject? DrWho42 04:11, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Since there's not a lot of episode list-specific activity, I was wondering maybe we should "merge" ourselves back with our parent project, WikiProject Television. Pretty much the main reason for LOE was to come up with a style-guideline for lists of episodes. We could merge some of our pages to WP:TV and then set up a dedicated sub-page with it's own talk page. I think we should do the same with WikiProject Television episodes. There's a lot of ideas and such that I've wanted to bring up, but it can be hard because they cross into a few different areas, including lists of episodes. Better integration with our parent project would still allow us to do all the things we've been doing independently, but allow for easier collaboration and make things easier to find. Thoughts? -- Ned Scott 20:14, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:
and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 22:01, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Fair use/Fair use images in lists is revived, this time for a concrete proposal. The talk page has been dead for a while, but I have archived it and taken a new fresh start. I hope this time we will be able to achieve something as I have summarized the main points of both sides (feel free to improve them) and I call you to express your support or oppose on the proposal that I have formulated. Thanks, Renata 02:38, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Have we decided on whether there should be spoilers in the short summaries in the list of TV episodes pages? - Peregrinefisher 18:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
I would also like input on this. I recently had a long discussion with another editor: Talk:List of Kidnapped episodes/Archive 1, Kidnapped (2006) spoilers, and am concerned as to how it can be decided what information in a summary is too much, and why. x 16:46, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Great, thanks. Those are good examples. What is a useful response to someone who feels that a spoiler might "ruin the show" for someone who hasn't seen it and decides to remove the spoiler? I tried explaining that there was a spoiler warning, but to no avail. x 23:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
I was the other editor with whom Xtramental had a discussion about spoilers, and my point was not that we shouldn't ruin the show with spoilers, but that we should try to be consistent throughout the list of episodes in the level of spoilers that were given. In other words, if this page had major spoilers all through it, I would not have objected to that - yes, readers have to proceed at their own risk. In fact i've often written summaries with spoilers elsewhere. But in fact people (not me) had written up all of the other episodes for this show in a manner that gave up minor spoilers but did not reveal major plot twists, so it appeared to me that the sense of the page was to not reveal major plot twists. In other words, I thought it would be right for there to be some consensus on the page about the level of spoilers given up, and some consistency between episodes, and that no one's words were above being slightly edited, which is all that happened there - an extremely minor edit to one random episode's summary (not the conclusion or something like that) that I felt went unnecessarily beyond the level of spoilers that had been established on the page by revealing the gender of someone who was involved in the crime. It was actually not a big deal at all - I made a very small edit and he didn;'t like my changing his words - I brought it to talk and actually we worked out a compromise that was ok with me and almost identical to his original. This was not the big deal he's portraying, so I don't know why he's still talking about it - I did not say all spoilers should be removed at all - I just minorly edited his summary for that one episone on that page. If you write on wikipedia you have to be prepared to have your words changed by other editors if they see things slightly differently than you do. Tvoz | talk 07:43, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
x 16:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
"Maybe we should add a little section to point to on the project page saying "summarize, don't tease."
I would like to see some kind of guideline regarding this as well, although slightly more comprehensive; mainly because it's not only about summary vs teaser, but that teasers are not really encyclopedic, that spoilers shouldn't be removed merely because they're spoilers, and that a summary's content shouldn't be removed merely to make it consistent in style with other summaries in the article. Granted, less is more regarding guidelines, and this all might be implicit in general Wiki guidelines, but the two examples above suggest it may need to be more explicit. So, is this a reasonable suggestion?
x 16:15, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
We received this suggestion for military history in the Sahara/Sahel region. Well, it is no actual military history event, but a TV series. I think you know better how to handle it. Greetings Wandalstouring 13:50, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
What do we do when the episode list gets too long? For example, List of Smallville episodes has over 115 summaries and screenshots. Other pages have way more. Do we devide it into ~100 per page, or what? Thanks, Peregrinefisher 05:01, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi, at List of Winx Club episodes we'd like to think about applying a template, cos we think they look cool. :) The problem with this is that each episode has four different titles - the Italian original name, a literal translation, the Rainbow/UK english dub, and the 4kids english dub. If anyone could give some advice, that would be very much appreciated. The page itself is semi-protected atm due to vandalism. - Malkinann 12:57, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
I forgot to note this here on the talk page for anyone who missed it, but List of The Sopranos episodes is now a Featured list. -- Ned Scott 19:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
There is currently an active debate at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television) about the naming of episode articles, such as when is it appropriate to use a suffix such as (<series name> episode), and whether or not WikiProjects should have the right to set guidelines for their particular shows. Any interested editors are invited to comment, at Wikipedia_talk:Naming conventions (television)#Request for comment. Thanks. -- Elonka 08:56, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Beginning cross-post.
End cross-post. Please do not comment more in this section.
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:25, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
I've created an RFC to work out the details involved in making useful filmography sections. Check it out at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Filmography. - Peregrinefisher 21:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
I've recently nominated List of Only Fools and Horses episodes for a peer review. Any comments and suggested improvements will be much appreciated. Thanks. SteveO 19:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
List of Charmed episodes could do with some colour to match the DVD cases, much like The Simpsons' list has. Could anyone more familiar with doing this lend a hand? ~ Zythe Talk to me! 13:53, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
How does one add items to the "To Do" list contained within the LOE box on the article's talk page (in this case the List of Farscape episodes)? Feel free to answer on my talk page RoyBatty42 20:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm, followed the links, but did not get info I needed. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I wanted to add things that were ONLY for that page's "to do" list as I've seen on other talk pages for specific articles. RoyBatty42 03:15, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Ah, that's it. Thanks RoyBatty42 04:26, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
List of RahXephon media is a Featured List Candidate. Disucssion here: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of RahXephon media. -- GunnarRene 22:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Is there any reason why two part episodes have to be in the same article?
Just because they share the same title does not mean that they are the same.
Doing this means a lot more information in the info box.
Eg:
This is from the info box from the episode Kill Ari episodes of
NCIS
{{Infobox Television episode | Title = Kill Ari
| Colour =
| Series = [[NCIS (TV series)|NCIS]]
| Season = 3
| Episode = 1 and 2
| Image = [[image:NCIS-03x01.jpg|250px]]
| Airdate = [[September 20]], [[2005]]<br/>[[September 27]], [[2005]]
| Production = 03x01<br/>03x02
| Writer = [[Donald P. Bellisario]]
| Director = [[Dennis Smith]] (Part 1)<br/>[[James Whitmore Jr.]] (Part 2)
| Guests = [[Rudolf Martin]] as [[Ari Haswari]]<br/>[[Pancho Demmings]] as [[Gerald Jackson]] <br/>[[Lauren Holly]] as [[Jenny Shepard]]</br>[[Alan Dale]] as [[Tom Morrow]]
| Episode list = [[List of NCIS episodes|Episode chronology]]
| Prev = [[Twilight (NCIS episode)]]| Next = [[Mind Games (NCIS)|Mind Games]]
}}
If it was on separate pages you would not have to specify who wrote and directed each part and you would not have two separate air dates.
It is not necessary to have them on the same page.
If you will see other shows such as Charmed, House and even Buffy the Vampire Slayer have two part episodes on separate pages.
Mhrmaw 10:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
![]() Archives |
---|
Old WP:TVE:
Old WP:LOE:
|
Wikipedia:WikiProject List of Television Episodes/structure needs to be updated a bit and cleaned up to reflect the formatting currently being used by the templates and such. I've started to edit some stuff, trying to stick with things that I think you'll all agree with. Feel free to revert, edit, reword, anything you don't think sounds right. Any major concerns should be brought to ether this talk page or to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject List of Television Episodes/structure. I think it's important that we still explain the article layout even without using templates. For one, it shows people what the templates are actually doing, in raw form, as well as giving editors a non-template option, if there be a need for it. In addition, I think we should strive to eventually get this, or something like this, into the Manual of Style as an official guideline, in which case we would have to explain all the formatting details.
In addition to the changes I made, there should also be a section about references, which is one requirement for Featured list status. I also think we should come up with some guidelines to help deal with lists that are embedded into their main articles and not big enough to split. Maybe even explore other formatting appearances that would still be acceptable, to give some additional options.
This should at least get the ball rolling. I think it might be a good idea to inform some other wikiprojects about the updates to get their input, since our membership is still pretty small. -- Ned Scott 02:40, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
I just noticed how nice the cell shading was done for the row that contains title and air date in The Simpsons season 4. It really helps to visually separate the information and makes it easier to read. Maybe we should apply this to our style guidelines and templates? -- Ned Scott 20:07, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
I think we should strive to keep the same names for the parameters of the templates where possible. Also we should probably make some comments on things like "Guest stars, directors, writers etc.". Personally i prefer the way Grey's Anatomy and Simpsons Season 4 do this. It's much more readable then having it in seperate columns. - TheDJ ( talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 22:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi, one of your project's leaders made a comment on the page List of Stargate SG-1 episodes. I would just like to say that I have responded and made a proposal that I think you will like. Please respond on the SG-1 list's talk page; we should keep the thread in one place. Tobyk777 08:07, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
I was thinking we should evaluate the categories we have right now and see if there's any possible restructering / renaming / etc. Also, we should probably note a bit more as some form of guideline, even just a short one on the main project page, about how to select the appropate category. Here's a list of our current categories:
and there you have it. If anyone hasn't already done so, be sure to read / skim through Wikipedia:Categorization when coming up with suggestions and ideas. -- Ned Scott 09:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Fair use/Fair use images in lists for a request for comment about the use of fair use images in lists. This RFC arose out of a dispute about the use of images on list of Lost episodes and has grown beyond that article to have broader significance for lists generally. Please join the discussion if you are interested in this issue. -- bainer ( talk) 05:03, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
At List of Justice League episodes,we have an editor who wants to split all of the episodes off at once into their own articles. Unfortunately for him, the majority of editors has asked him not to create so many stubs at once, saying that the current page should be expanded before we go to individual episodes. Despite several Wikipedia bans over the last month, this editor refuses to listen, is uncivil toward the editors who do not agree with him, and continuously splits of articles and reverts the current one dispute consensus being against it. He is now seeking support at a number of other TV articles. This has gone on far too long. I have asked as a compromise that he add the information he wants to add to the current article so that it will expand enough to split off. I would appreciate it if editors from here came and provided some guidance one way or the other because I have never seen one editor rage against a number of other editors and revert their edits for so long.-- Chris Griswold 06:50, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
I've placed a notice using {{ WikiProject LOE}} in regards to the current RFC about fair use images in Lists of episodes. Normally I'd be against using a WikiProject banner for posting this type of notice, but I feel the issue is very important to our WikiProject, and will effect many articles that we are involved with. For the sake of informing other editors, this seemed to be a good idea. The message can easily be removed, and is very efficient in informing many effected articles and editors with little effort. I don't think this is something we should make a habit of, in any case, but feel this is a special case. -- Ned Scott 04:14, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Please tell me if this is not the right place to being this up:
I like the boxes at the top of some episode lists such as List of The Simpsons episodes, since they are a summary that links you to the appropriate season and provide some extra information about DVD releases on the same page. Having DVD release dates and cover art there isn't entirely necessary in my opinion but that's a minor quibble, it doesn't take up much room to have that there.
What I am against is the massive expansion of this on some pages to have a great long explanation of which episodes are on which DVD sets, such as the pages on Family Guy, the word "summary" has actually been changed to "DVD releases" because there's so much DVD info there, plus the information in this cases is not presented very well anyway. Some shows (including Family Guy) have their own pages for discussing DVD information, and in my opinion even if there isn't it should go on the article's main page. Can I confirm that it's not good practice to have a summary box like this? It's an episode list after all, not a list of DVDs. I thought I'd seen a couple of other pages where there was a lot of DVD stuff in the sumary box but I can't put my finger on them now Jimbow25 18:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi. I've done some refactoring work on your Project's categories and templates today (along with several other WikiProjects). I'm confident you'll find that the new organisation a big improvement. For more information and a rationale please see what I've written at Wikipedia:WikiProject/Best_practices#Categorisation or drop me a line on my talk page.
If you're not yet assessing articles for Wikipedia 1.0 and using Mathbot, you might also find Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index of subjects and it's talk page very useful. -- kingboyk 17:21, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Currently we've been formatting episodes by air date, but I noticed that List of Justice League episodes does it by title/ story. Basically, instead of splitting the entries by Part one, part two, etc, they did that. Depending on the nature of the show, and maybe some other factors, I can see this as a good idea. What does everyone think? -- Ned Scott 20:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
I made the background of the ShortSummary cell white, to help the tables not look so dark. This has also made more contrast between the shading of the Title row. Thoughts? good? bad? -- Ned Scott 20:10, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure why this hasn't been included in either of the templates, but I've included the ability to set a caption that will appear as tooltip on the images. -- TheFarix ( Talk) 17:38, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Just noticed this now, but apparently there's been some discussion about Wikipedia:List guideline (see Wikipedia talk:List guideline) about reforming the basic guidelines for lists and list articles. A proposal has come out of that discussion, Wikipedia:List guidelines reborn and will be discussed on Wikipedia talk:List guidelines reborn. I haven't looked at it in depth myself yet, but I thought I'd pass the word. -- Ned Scott 05:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
The episode list for this is severely lacking. Could the members here please lavish some care onto it? Ta. -- Jamdav86 20:50, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Has red links to many the episodes, flip-flops between disambigs and part listings, all jobs that are relevant to the list editor. -- Jamdav86 18:33, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
TrackerTV has created a barnstar proposal relating to Broadcasting. I would really appreciate it if interested people could give an opinion here.-- Ed 20:58, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
People are taking consensus against the conventions in this page. Votes are needed to keep the work up in that page. These people (I think most of them don't even get any work done on the article, just criticize) don't want neither expand the synopsis on the episode list nor create articles per episode and it happens in most cases. -- T-man, the wise 06:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Just thought I'd note here that we're playing around the ability to link to specific episode entries, same way the # article-section links work, at Template talk:Episode list#Page anchors. We're also looking to make the optional parameters more efficient and solving the problem of what to do when you have an optional parameter that isn't filled out at Template talk:Episode list#Empty Cells. -- Ned Scott 05:47, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Hello, Could you please add your opinion (or voice your support or a opposition) at this page.
It could decide the fate of colours in not only episode infoboxes but, nav boxes, celeb boxes.. (The bars in between episodes guides..) etc. MatthewFenton ( talk • contribs) 10:46, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
and other great stuff. I'm a bit tired right now, so sorry if my message seems a bit sloppy tonight.
The problem of, say, having Aux1 for director, but then having an episode where it wasn't filled out would result in the cells shifting over. This is no longer a problem. Instead of the parameter being filled out being the trigger for the cell, now wether or not the parameter is listed in the template triggers the cell. Also, the colored line divider should now be IE compatible. And there's no more need for a "non image" template, any episode list that doesn't wish to use images (and wishes thus to not have a column for images) simply needs to remove the |Image=
parameter from the template listing (the reverse of the above). Lists that don't wish to have images or summaries, and thus don't need a color divider only need to remove both |ShortSummary=
and |Image=
. Been reading up about templates and it finally hit me on how to fix those issues.
These fixes are not live yet, they are only on my sandbox page. All of the episode lists (about 100 or so) need to be updated via bot (I can run mine) to remove unused parameters from being listed. The side effect of this fix is, if you don't have a column for "alt date" but you use |AltDate=
then a cell will be created for Alt date. The bot will check for and remove such parameters which aren't being used (with a human inspecting each of the final results). Oh, and the Japanese episode list template will also be merged, but still keeping it's custom foreign title parameters (they'll just be equal to Title and AltTitle, etc).
The new template code that I've been playing around with is at User:Ned Scott/sandbox and examples can be seen at User:Ned Scott/sandbox2 (be sure to look at the page in the edit view to see what I mean).
Still have some more tweaks, and then run the bot through, which should actually be a simple process. But I do want some other people to look at it incase I missed anything (which I probably did, like I said, I'm a bit tired right now :) ) and give their inputs and such. Also, be sure to look at the examples in other web browsers and see if you can spot any compatibility issues. Again, any input, feedback, whatever is welcome. -- Ned Scott 09:38, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
|EpisodeNumber= |EpisodeNumber2= |ProdCode= |Title= |AltTitle= |Aux1= |Aux2= |OriginalAirDate= |AltDate= |Image= |ImageSize= |ImageCaption= |ShortSummary= |LineColor= |TopColor=
Example of minimal parameter use:
|EpisodeNumber= |Title= |OriginalAirDate=
Tyipical use:
|EpisodeNumber= |Title= |OriginalAirDate= |Image= |ShortSummary=
So to keep the instructions simple, I think the basic parameters should be introduced first, then show the extra options such as the colors, sizes, aux cells, etc. Oh yeah, and there's now |TopColor=
so people can change the shading of the title row if they want, like what is seen on
The Simpsons (season 2). --
Ned Scott 09:56, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
{{ Episode list (no image)}} now redirects to {{ Episode list}}, which has been updated using the sandbox template (with some more updates). Everything seems to work, but the line color divider looked really.. bad.. with some of the lighter colors. I changed it back to using the old line divider to the time being, not sure if we should find another way or just update the articles with light colors. I updated all the articles that used unused parameters, and there seemed to be no major issues. Most won't even notice a difference :)
Also, when there is no |Image=, the template swings around the episode number to the left hand side as it did with {{ Episode list (no image)}}, but in doing so now |TopColor= or it's default (or a manual entry of color for that first row) won't work at all when it is in a no-image state. As you can see from the edit history, it was driving me nuts last night, and I still can't seem to find the issue. The template is a bit hard to follow right now, it's not all nicely indented and such, but you should be able to see what I mean. And I still haven't figured out why using the # sign in a parameter messes it up (an old problem), which prevents us from using spelled out color values such as "blue" (as it would result in bgcolor="#blue" instead of ="blue"). If you are wondering why it has an if-statement for that color, it's so that lists without summaries or images can be presented without color options or a color line (a "simple" mode, of sorts).
Instructions have been updated a little bit, but in general could probably be updated to be more easier to follow. So that's where I'm at. I haven't gone through the articles that use unused parameters for {{ Japanese episode list}} yet, so they're still using the old template. When it's all said and done they'll all be using one template, while still being able to use specific parameters when there is a large demand for them. -- Ned Scott 19:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
moved from #/structure
It's probably best not to continue the dispute here. When you are asking for comments it's best just to give a brief neutral summary of the dispute and then link to the discussion and leave it at that. (Also, I couldn't help but notice you two yelling "POV" at each other. POV in a discussion is not an issue in Wikipedia, that's the whole point of giving one's opinion or thoughts on an issue. The neutral point of view policy is only about how we write article text, not about discussions and comments... In other words POV is ok on the talk page because you're in a discussion. ) -- Ned Scott 01:54, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Am I right in saying that listings of shows having aired on a particular programming block as: S.C.I.F.I. World and Cartoon Quest for the Sci Fi Channel, would not be covered by this WikiProject? DrWho42 04:11, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Since there's not a lot of episode list-specific activity, I was wondering maybe we should "merge" ourselves back with our parent project, WikiProject Television. Pretty much the main reason for LOE was to come up with a style-guideline for lists of episodes. We could merge some of our pages to WP:TV and then set up a dedicated sub-page with it's own talk page. I think we should do the same with WikiProject Television episodes. There's a lot of ideas and such that I've wanted to bring up, but it can be hard because they cross into a few different areas, including lists of episodes. Better integration with our parent project would still allow us to do all the things we've been doing independently, but allow for easier collaboration and make things easier to find. Thoughts? -- Ned Scott 20:14, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:
and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 22:01, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Fair use/Fair use images in lists is revived, this time for a concrete proposal. The talk page has been dead for a while, but I have archived it and taken a new fresh start. I hope this time we will be able to achieve something as I have summarized the main points of both sides (feel free to improve them) and I call you to express your support or oppose on the proposal that I have formulated. Thanks, Renata 02:38, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Have we decided on whether there should be spoilers in the short summaries in the list of TV episodes pages? - Peregrinefisher 18:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
I would also like input on this. I recently had a long discussion with another editor: Talk:List of Kidnapped episodes/Archive 1, Kidnapped (2006) spoilers, and am concerned as to how it can be decided what information in a summary is too much, and why. x 16:46, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Great, thanks. Those are good examples. What is a useful response to someone who feels that a spoiler might "ruin the show" for someone who hasn't seen it and decides to remove the spoiler? I tried explaining that there was a spoiler warning, but to no avail. x 23:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
I was the other editor with whom Xtramental had a discussion about spoilers, and my point was not that we shouldn't ruin the show with spoilers, but that we should try to be consistent throughout the list of episodes in the level of spoilers that were given. In other words, if this page had major spoilers all through it, I would not have objected to that - yes, readers have to proceed at their own risk. In fact i've often written summaries with spoilers elsewhere. But in fact people (not me) had written up all of the other episodes for this show in a manner that gave up minor spoilers but did not reveal major plot twists, so it appeared to me that the sense of the page was to not reveal major plot twists. In other words, I thought it would be right for there to be some consensus on the page about the level of spoilers given up, and some consistency between episodes, and that no one's words were above being slightly edited, which is all that happened there - an extremely minor edit to one random episode's summary (not the conclusion or something like that) that I felt went unnecessarily beyond the level of spoilers that had been established on the page by revealing the gender of someone who was involved in the crime. It was actually not a big deal at all - I made a very small edit and he didn;'t like my changing his words - I brought it to talk and actually we worked out a compromise that was ok with me and almost identical to his original. This was not the big deal he's portraying, so I don't know why he's still talking about it - I did not say all spoilers should be removed at all - I just minorly edited his summary for that one episone on that page. If you write on wikipedia you have to be prepared to have your words changed by other editors if they see things slightly differently than you do. Tvoz | talk 07:43, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
x 16:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
"Maybe we should add a little section to point to on the project page saying "summarize, don't tease."
I would like to see some kind of guideline regarding this as well, although slightly more comprehensive; mainly because it's not only about summary vs teaser, but that teasers are not really encyclopedic, that spoilers shouldn't be removed merely because they're spoilers, and that a summary's content shouldn't be removed merely to make it consistent in style with other summaries in the article. Granted, less is more regarding guidelines, and this all might be implicit in general Wiki guidelines, but the two examples above suggest it may need to be more explicit. So, is this a reasonable suggestion?
x 16:15, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
We received this suggestion for military history in the Sahara/Sahel region. Well, it is no actual military history event, but a TV series. I think you know better how to handle it. Greetings Wandalstouring 13:50, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
What do we do when the episode list gets too long? For example, List of Smallville episodes has over 115 summaries and screenshots. Other pages have way more. Do we devide it into ~100 per page, or what? Thanks, Peregrinefisher 05:01, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi, at List of Winx Club episodes we'd like to think about applying a template, cos we think they look cool. :) The problem with this is that each episode has four different titles - the Italian original name, a literal translation, the Rainbow/UK english dub, and the 4kids english dub. If anyone could give some advice, that would be very much appreciated. The page itself is semi-protected atm due to vandalism. - Malkinann 12:57, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
I forgot to note this here on the talk page for anyone who missed it, but List of The Sopranos episodes is now a Featured list. -- Ned Scott 19:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
There is currently an active debate at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television) about the naming of episode articles, such as when is it appropriate to use a suffix such as (<series name> episode), and whether or not WikiProjects should have the right to set guidelines for their particular shows. Any interested editors are invited to comment, at Wikipedia_talk:Naming conventions (television)#Request for comment. Thanks. -- Elonka 08:56, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Beginning cross-post.
End cross-post. Please do not comment more in this section.
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:25, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
I've created an RFC to work out the details involved in making useful filmography sections. Check it out at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Filmography. - Peregrinefisher 21:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
I've recently nominated List of Only Fools and Horses episodes for a peer review. Any comments and suggested improvements will be much appreciated. Thanks. SteveO 19:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
List of Charmed episodes could do with some colour to match the DVD cases, much like The Simpsons' list has. Could anyone more familiar with doing this lend a hand? ~ Zythe Talk to me! 13:53, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
How does one add items to the "To Do" list contained within the LOE box on the article's talk page (in this case the List of Farscape episodes)? Feel free to answer on my talk page RoyBatty42 20:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm, followed the links, but did not get info I needed. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I wanted to add things that were ONLY for that page's "to do" list as I've seen on other talk pages for specific articles. RoyBatty42 03:15, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Ah, that's it. Thanks RoyBatty42 04:26, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
List of RahXephon media is a Featured List Candidate. Disucssion here: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of RahXephon media. -- GunnarRene 22:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Is there any reason why two part episodes have to be in the same article?
Just because they share the same title does not mean that they are the same.
Doing this means a lot more information in the info box.
Eg:
This is from the info box from the episode Kill Ari episodes of
NCIS
{{Infobox Television episode | Title = Kill Ari
| Colour =
| Series = [[NCIS (TV series)|NCIS]]
| Season = 3
| Episode = 1 and 2
| Image = [[image:NCIS-03x01.jpg|250px]]
| Airdate = [[September 20]], [[2005]]<br/>[[September 27]], [[2005]]
| Production = 03x01<br/>03x02
| Writer = [[Donald P. Bellisario]]
| Director = [[Dennis Smith]] (Part 1)<br/>[[James Whitmore Jr.]] (Part 2)
| Guests = [[Rudolf Martin]] as [[Ari Haswari]]<br/>[[Pancho Demmings]] as [[Gerald Jackson]] <br/>[[Lauren Holly]] as [[Jenny Shepard]]</br>[[Alan Dale]] as [[Tom Morrow]]
| Episode list = [[List of NCIS episodes|Episode chronology]]
| Prev = [[Twilight (NCIS episode)]]| Next = [[Mind Games (NCIS)|Mind Games]]
}}
If it was on separate pages you would not have to specify who wrote and directed each part and you would not have two separate air dates.
It is not necessary to have them on the same page.
If you will see other shows such as Charmed, House and even Buffy the Vampire Slayer have two part episodes on separate pages.
Mhrmaw 10:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)