This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | → | Archive 35 |
Just a heads up, I've removed a number of "For the current season" links at the top of television series articles. Including such links violates WP:TVGUIDE: "electronic program guide [...]. For example, an article on a broadcaster should not list upcoming events, [...] current schedules." Especially when such links are already available in the article. There's still more to remove per search results. -- Alex TW 00:02, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia articles are not: [...] Directories, directory entries, electronic program guides. Linking the current or next season makes the article the definition of a program directory and guide. For what it's worth, this version is terrible - they linked the draft itself! -- Alex TW 09:33, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
"1) "Broadcaster" in this sense would refer to the channel that the show airs on, not the show itself. A show does not / cannot "broadcast" itself. 2) This is not a "current schedule", it's a useful link to those looking specifically information about the current season. Schedule in this sense, would be "that airs on Friday at 9/8c"". Lastly, agreeing with Whats new? on
I imagine a lot of readers search for the show, land on the series page, but are after the current season. TheDoctorWho (talk) 01:54, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
I imagine a lot of readers search for the show, land on the series page, but are after the current season.Yes, I imagine they are, but we're not here to make things "easy". We're here to list down content correctly. Do we add "For the current season, see List of Riverdale episodes#Season 3 (2018)", or similar section-linked content? No. To list the current season makes it a TV guide. (Also going back to the link that I missed, 2018–19 United States network television schedule is terrible as well.) -- Alex TW 02:12, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
we're not here to make things "easy". We're here to list down content correctly. I think that's a bit harsh. Accuracy is important, but being user friendly should also be a consideration. A hatnote linking to a current season article is very different to linking to a section of a 'List of episodes' article, and is more common in unscripted programs where the season typically has little relevance to the previous one (new contestants, different challenges, etc). I don't see how a simple hatnote rises to the level of becoming a TV guide -- Whats new? (talk) 03:06, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
This is where you have to use common sense and think about things logically vs exaggeration. We're not duplicating links in the sense of repeating the link multiple times in the same paragraph. For some articles the next closest link may be the series overview (after which the reader is taken to the list of episodes article, then has to click another link before being taken to the season article itself). What's the difference of having a link to an actor in the Infobox, and repeating the link in the cast and characters section but not having a hatnote at the top and another link later in the article??? If you want to go as far as removing all duplicate links should we remove all the actor links in the cast and character section (not suggesting this, just attempting to put it in perspective)? TheDoctorWho (talk) 03:24, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
"Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but if helpful for readers, a link may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, hatnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead".
For example, an article on a broadcaster should not list upcoming events, current promotions, current schedules,...which is what you originally quoted in WP:NOTTVGUIDE. The hatnote doesn't list a string of "upcoming events, current promotions" or a "current schedule". -- Whats new? (talk) 06:12, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
"...although mention of major events, promotions or historically significant program lists and schedules may be acceptable."which those articles would likely meet, but that's a side issue in any event -- Whats new? (talk) 06:18, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
The hatnote doesn't list a string of "upcoming events"; then "For the upcoming season ..."If this is your only problem then maybe we need to come up with when it's okay to include a hatnote. Perhaps only adding the hatnote after the season begins similar to how we only update the season number after it begins? TheDoctorWho (talk) 07:39, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
So did we come to a consensus that the hatnotes were beneficial to articles and readers. Just asking so that I can reinstate them on the articles that they were removed from. TheDoctorWho (talk) 03:45, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Alright, I restored a number of the notes before being accused of
WP:HOUNDING by Alex (whatever though, I'm not here to fight that). But in respect, I've stopped and Alex "can and may"
restore the rest "when they get the time"
although, I suppose there's nothing really holding them to that so the notes may be lost in edit histories for a while.
TheDoctorWho
(talk) 13:22, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
So, I was reading
MOS:SECTION recently, and under the guidelines for headings, it states that headers should be unique within a page (otherwise section links may lead to the wrong place, and edit summaries may be ambiguous)
. While reading this, I thought about how a lot of television articles (especially episode lists with ratings) don't follow this. For example,
List of Riverdale episodes, which has two links to each of "Season 1 (2017)", "Season 2 (2017–18)" and "Season 3 (2018)". Given that we often request that editors follow our MoS as strongly as possible, shouldn't we follow other such MoS's? --
Alex
TW 07:06, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
Not redundantly refer [..] to a higher-level heading, unless doing so is shorter or clearer.so using "Season 3 (2018) ratings" would also not be in line with that MoS. -- Gonnym ( talk) 09:15, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
be unique within a page, given that
edit summaries may be ambiguous. -- Alex TW 13:11, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
The reception information should include broadcast ratings and critical response. For broadcast ratings, it may be easier to maintain seasonal averages for the main page, while the season and episode articles could contain a list of ratings for all the episodes. Lists of ratings on episode articles should be included under headers that state the season involved, without a year, to comply with Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Section headings in not having headers duplicate the episode table sections.
And finally, once episode 12 aired on January 7, 2014, it would be changed once again to "Season 11 (2013–14)". Sections for ratings tables on episode articles should only include the season, not a year (see #Reception for more).-- Alex TW 00:22, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
in not having headers duplicate the episode table sections- I'm not comfortable with this wording. The actual aim is to ensure that section headings remain unique. There's nothing in Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Section headings about episode tables and this is likely to confuse some editors. As I said above, we have to dumb some things down and (attempt to) make it so that even editors with poor writing skills are not confused. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 07:08, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
in not having headers duplicate any pre-existing headers? -- Alex TW 08:30, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
How might we clarify the meaning of the terms "television production?" From a production crews perspective there are two working production models commonly used that are different and yet use the same terms. Crews involved in live broadcasts, as in talk shows and sports events are of one type. Crews who produce content made for television broadcast as in dramatic episodic shows and films made for television, use their crafts in a much different way. One model is linear and the other non-linear, and those distinction have been around from the beginning of television broadcasting and documented in many related Wiki articles. The creation and production of a show made for television broadcast and it actual broadcast and syndication has distinct components. The task of an Executive Producer is different when he or she is producing the Olympics broadcasts verses a film made for television verses episodic films. The person scripting each works differently, as do the crafts filming. The most notable difference is in post-production where choices are made on what the audience see and the sound scape. May I suggest that we clarify by saying either "television film production" (meaning all production made in the non-linear mode or "television live production" meaning all productions shot and aired live. Filmedit48 ( talk) 20:43, 29 November 2018 (UTC) http://www.davidpublisher.org/index.php/Home/Article/index?id=33044.html
So, I've complied a list of the WikiProject Television's standard practices:
These are, as far as I know, all unwritten rules that we cannot quote or link to when questioned about them, which makes it hard to implement or execute them. I'm wanting to incorporate them somewhere into the Wiki, so that we can quote or link to when questioned about them. Any practices I've missed, or ideas on where to implement? -- Alex TW 08:36, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
RTitle
use makes sense – in those cases where The Futon Critic has an individual episode press release, that includes additional info such as the director and writers (and guest cast). But Futon doesn't have those for every episode of every series, and in those cases where there's not director/writer info for an upcoming episode, I would agree that an RTitle
is not needed in that case, and a column source is fine... --
IJBall (
contribs •
talk) 16:29, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
I have no strong opinion on 1, 7 or 8. On 2, I'm comfortable with keeping RTitle sources where they're available, just not making them mandatory or expected after airing, but don't see the value in removing them if they've been added. Strongly support 3 and 4. I don't really support 5 - much along the same lines as 2, if a synopsis can be sourced reliabily then I don't see why it can't be added in advance of airing (and Wiki contains spoilers). On 6, I don't know that it is necessary to mandate how many decimals/sig figs should be used across the board, and it should probably be based on a combination of available data and editor discretion. I'd also like to throw into 6 that viewership need not be rounded by millions when all or nearly all episodes are below 1 million viewers (for example, there's no need for ratings figures at List of Animals episodes to be written as 0.239 etc when "millions" is not relevant because no episode gets close - "239,000" would be better in my opinion). -- Whats new? (talk) 22:50, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
"239,000" would be better in my opinion. A great example of this is List of Wentworth episodes. -- Alex TW 00:20, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Support the newly-added 9 FWIW -- Whats new? (talk) 09:21, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Just a heads up about the upcoming Netflix Dracula series and its respective articles. The series not yet gone into production, and thus is too early for a separate article, per the consensus of WP:TV on the early existence of series articles. The series now has links at Dracula (upcoming miniseries) and Dracula (2020 TV series) (both redirects to Dracula in popular culture#Television), as well as Draft:Dracula (upcoming miniseries) and Draft:Dracula (2020 TV series) (the current location of the draft with correct disambiguation). The number of links is due to an editor moving the article to mainspace locations with incorrect disambiguation despite a lack of production commencement. -- Alex TW 02:01, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Gran Hermano 1 (Spain)#Requested move 1 December 2018 . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 13:02, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Queen America#Guest stars and recurring. — Lbtocth talk 23:21, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Giant Robo (OVA)#Requested move 5 December 2018. This is a requested move looking to establish a consensus on how to name "OVA" series-type anime titles. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 00:29, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Secret Story 1 (Portugal)#Requested move 5 December 2018 . This move request involves a proposal to use a new disambig tag for article titles not currently in use by WP:NCTV. Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 19:10, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Template:Big Brother housemates, Template:Big Brother endgame and Template:Big Brother endgame2 has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox television season. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 20:10, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
How should we split, and clean up, Food Paradise? Please join the discussion at Talk:Food Paradise#Page size, and help. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:37, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2018_December_4#1960–61_United_States_network_television_schedule_(Saturday_morning)), which is about a wikipedia that is within the scope of this WikiProject. Levivich ( talk) 00:51, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/1980–81_United_States_network_television_schedule_(Saturday_morning) , which is about a wikipedia that is within the scope of this WikiProject. Levivich ( talk) 00:51, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Can I get some opinions on the layout of Template:The Big Bang Theory? We shouldn't be forcing templates to do what they're not designed to do, such as forcing empty sections with only a header link, because when a header link is provided but there's no content, the section hides by default. I have previously attempted to change the layout to be more user-friendly and in-line with the actual template:
Thoughts? Alternate layouts? -- Alex TW 01:55, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Secret Story 2010 (Greece) . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 19:22, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Survivor VIP (Israel) appeared on my radar recently when it was added to Category:2019 Israeli television seasons which shouldn't exist yet as no episodes have aired yet in 2019, it still being 2018. I've raised that issue previously, at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television/Archive 19#Category:2015 television seasons but the categories keep getting populated year after year, months before any episodes have aired and well before the year has even started. However, that's actually tangential to this. There's not a single reference in Survivor VIP (Israel), just a lot of premature tables. I'd normally take action on this article myself but I'm involved in a discussion at Category talk:2019 television seasons#Speedy deletion request so I'd appreciate involvement/comment from others. There is also a comment from Katanin in an edit summary about better naming conventions for "these" pages, [1] so that is probably something that needs addressing as well. The previous seasons are named a little bit inconsistently. For example, Survivor (Israel): VIP is called "Survivor 10: V.I.P" in the lede and is stated to be the 6th season. I'm really not sure what is going on with this series. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 16:43, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
If there are multiple shows of the same name, include the disambiguation, similar to the above for TV series in the season description, for example, "The Apprentice (U.S. season 1)" and "The Apprentice (UK series one)". Not following this with survivor is the controversial, non-consensus way. -- Gonnym ( talk) 13:05, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Les Misérables (2018 TV series)#Article title instability. Should Les Misérables be disambiguated as (2018 TV series) or (2018 miniseries)? -- Alex TW 14:34, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Note that this issue has been raised before with zero participation, so I am avoiding the standard template message which has already been cluttering up this page. Modernponderer ( talk) 08:29, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
AlexTheWhovian & I are having an update episode count dispute. When did it became ok to update episode count BEFORE the new episode airing time? According to MOS:TV and (here) WP:TV, we don't update episode count until a new episode begins airing. WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL — Lbtocth talk 15:50, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
It looks like Alex was reverted because he updated the episode count a minute(Though most likely less considering Wikipedia doesn't record seconds) before said episode aired. That's absurd, I've seen plenty of pages where editors don't even bother to update for weeks if not months. I'm left to update(Though I often forget) when I'm adding the numbers for the cable show in question. How such a non issue has become an issue is ridiculous, at least someone makes the effort to update the episode counts. Esuka323 ( talk) 19:44, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Alex was reverted because he updated the episode count a minute(Though most likely less considering Wikipedia doesn't record seconds) before said episode aired. That's absurdExactly my point, thank you. It was a matter of seconds; by the time Lbtocth had an issue with it, it was already well into airing. It's being pedantic to demand it exactly on time. I update 8/7c series at 11.30am my time - my clock was out by a few seconds, what's the big deal? -- Alex TW 23:22, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Many programmes begin airing before the literal minute at which they are scheduled to begin. But even if you are certain that an episode has not aired in any location, reverting seconds before broadcast is not appropriate. Consider WP:IAR, WP:COMMONSENSE and the intent behind the policy to update after an episode airs, not its exact wording. — Bilorv (c) (talk) 20:25, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Bilorv, I know I probably shouldn't have reverted. I am in the wrong in that. But, when did it became ok to update episode count BEFORE the new episode airing time? Because when I done that I got reverted by veteran editors. — Lbtocth talk 20:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
How about updating when the episode has completed broadcasting in its primary market? Then it resolves any issues of it being interrupted by other programming. For streamed releases, this should be as soon as it has officially released. AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 23:42, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
|num_episodes=
can only be updated after an episode airs even though there are plenty of sources with the entire schedule for all 13 episodes?? If this is the case this will most likely cause an unnecessary dispute with that article when it starts using {{
Infobox television season}} instead of {{
Big Brother housemates}}.
Alucard 16
❯❯❯ chat? 23:49, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
|num_episodes=
on the season page even if it has been confirmed the number of episodes for the season. See
The Flash (season 5), we don't put 22 episodes on it. On the Series Overview, you can with a reliable source. See
List of The Flash episodes#Series overview. —
Lbtocth
talk 00:05, 11 December 2018 (UTC)|num_episodes=
. Such as like Netflix originals. —
Lbtocth
talk 00:22, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Do we use the 7-day or 28-day data from BARB? If a series of a long-running show has started before four-screen dashboard is available do we use the same data but from the new source? Ratings at Holby City (series 20) haven't been updated since September so quite a few episodes lack the data. The latest Doctor Who series uses a total 7-day data whereas the aforementioned Holby City article used 28-day TV-only data. Matt14451 ( talk) 16:05, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
I would say we should use 7-day TV-only data in episode tables as this is the metric that's "industry-agreed" according to BARB - [11]. This would go against both examples above. Matt14451 ( talk) 16:50, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Live +28 day ratings seem a little redundant. Most viewers watch a show within the first three to seven days, so the gains are negligible. Nielsen for example reports beyond the usual seven days, but press releases with +30 viewing from networks seem like, pointless. But I admit I'm not too familiar with UK viewing habits and my thoughts were more Nielsen related.
For example with Nielsen ratings, the C3 & C7 ratings are more important to networks, but they are generally at the same level as L+SD because people who DVR shows don't watch the commercials. I think if you're going to go with any sort of standard for UK ratings, you should go for the one that's more important. Esuka323 ( talk) 22:45, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Every Doctor Who season/series article always includes L+7, as it's typically the only reported statistic: This was true until August 2018, when BARB changed their reported data. Hence why it's the standard on Doctor Who, because it would only be possible to use the four-screen dashboard for series 11. This isn't a reason to use L+7 in the future, for instance on shows which begin in 2018 or later. (I agree that we shouldn't conflate two different types of data in one table; or if lack of data means we have to, this needs a footnote.) — Bilorv (c) (talk) 11:09, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
overnight / 7 day data can be mixed without issue, that's not what occurs in UK articles, or US for that matter, as articles on US series combine the data using {{ Television episode ratings}}, and only overnight is ever used in the episode tables. US articles never have replacements occurring in episode tables for viewers. -- Alex TW 23:29, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
BARB is reporting both L+7 and L+28. How they report it is irrelevant; they always have, they still are, and they likely will continue to always do so. -- Alex TW 13:15, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
If interested, please share your opinion on the Rfc on Character Names in plot summaries. Jauerback dude?/ dude.
Thought I would make all who follow this page aware of the deletion discussion occurring over two upcoming episodes of the television series Into the Dark. The discussion is happening here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Body (Into the Dark).
So, the American cable channel CourtTV, which has ultimately become TruTV, is set to relaunch in May 2019... as a "new" (old?!) cable channel, according to this article. So, IOW, TruTV will continue to exist, but CourtTV will now exist again as well!
Needless to say, this will be somewhat of a mess, necessitating a new article (eventually) at CourtTV (likely with a hatnote) rather than just the current redirect to TruTV.
Just posting this as a heads up to the denizens of WP:TV. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 22:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego? (TV show)#Requested move 16 December 2018. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 14:22, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
There is an ongoing discussion that may be of interest to the members of this board at Talk:Neil_deGrasse_Tyson#Text_proposals. ResultingConstant ( talk) 18:22, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi all, what are the guidelines for adding television programs and actors to articles? At
Bepannah and
Harshad Chopda, there have been numerous attempts to add SBS Telebration Awards and Asian Viewers Television Awards, neither of which have articles at Wikipedia. One of the editors who added it in good faith wrote in defense: "Telebrations is an award show to appreciate ITV talent. It is held by ABP News which is one of India's leading news channels. It has been held for around 10 years. More importantly, fans vote for it. Secondly, AVTA is an Asian Television award show in which the fans nominate and vote ... These aren't random award mills or weebly awards."
There's nothing at MOS:TV that would clearly indicate what to do in a situation like this, so I'm curious what the prevailing community attitude would for something like this. Do we add them? I don't know if these awards are televised or anything.
Cyphoidbomb (
talk) 15:50, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the AFD on this related subject. Jhenderson 777 05:08, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Big Brother 1 (UK)#Requested move 22 December 2018 . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 12:31, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Big Brother 1 (U.S.)#Requested move 22 December 2018 . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 12:31, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
I have suggested that a new WikiProject that may be of relevance to this one, be created. If you are interested in viewing the proposal or taking part in the discussion, please see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Fuller_House. mrwoogi010 Talk 23:48, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:New Warriors (TV series)#The end of the year. — Lbtocth talk 04:49, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television)#RfC on using US or U.S.. -- Whats new? (talk) 05:31, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
I'm not thrilled to what Pigsonthewing has been doing to the infoboxes, like he tried to merge Template:Infobox television season and Template:Infobox television episode into Template:Infobox television. That's unacceptable and a lot of users oppose this for the right reasons. BattleshipMan ( talk) 22:23, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
There is a discussion at MOS:TV that would probably benefit from input by editors from this project. The title is Bulletizing episode summaries at Who Is America?. However it involves bulletising summaries in all articles. Please participate but note that an admin has imposed a time limit of one week. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 19:21, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Who Is America?#Plot Summaries. – BoogerD ( talk) 22:26, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
How do we currently stand on splitting out episode lists? Normally I'd support splitting the episodes from a series article with 15 seasons to a separate LoE page but this unexplained, unattributed split has turned Tanked into little more than a stub as the episode list was virtually the entire article. All that is left now is the lede and infobox. The episode list is incomplete, with many episode summaries missing, so I really don't see a problem in this case having all of the episodes in the main article. What is everyones' opinion for these articles? -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 10:48, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
Yikes, I think the changes should be reverted if the editor isn't willing to put in the effort to expand the main article. There's enough information floating around for any reality show to pad an article out. It just takes someone willing and able to do the work to make such substantial contributions to the page. I think the question also needs to be asked, what benefit does the series having a "List of episodes" page really have? Because it's just empty tables with ratings information. Esuka323 ( talk) 22:37, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Twin Peaks (2017 TV series)#Requested move 1 January 2019. -- Wikipedical ( talk) 23:24, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
A recent discussion at Talk:Homecoming (TV series) determined that the "Camera" infobox field was inappropriately sourced to the TV show itself, which constitutes WP:OR. An editor pointed out that this parameter is widely used and usually unsourced, which means that it may need to be removed from a large number of articles if sourcing cannot be found. Posting here so that folks are aware of this consensus and the reason for these removals. – dlthewave ☎ 02:23, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi,i'm here to dicuss that there isn't a season 6 yet.I also added some summaries for the 18 19 and 20th episodes of season 5-- Tophat566 ( talk) 00:17, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
Continuing on from the above discussion, I have taken WP:NFF and copy-edited it to fit television series (see below). Should it be listed at WP:NFTV (Notability for Future Television Series), or added onto WP:TVSHOW? Perhaps added onto the end of it as a subsection, and WP:NFTV redirects to that subsection?
Rewording of NFTV
|
---|
Television series that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles, as budget issues, scripting issues and casting issues can interfere with a project well ahead of its intended seriesing date. The assumption should also not be made that because a series is likely to be a high-profile release it will be immune to setbacks—there is no "sure thing" production. Until the start of principal photography, information on the series might be included in articles about its subject material, if available. Sources must be used to confirm the start of principal photography after shooting has begun. In the case of animated series, reliable sources must confirm that the series is clearly out of the pre-production process, meaning that the final animation frames are actively being drawn and/or rendered, and final recordings of voice-overs and music have commenced. [1] Additionally, series that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released, should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines. Similarly, series produced in the past which were either not completed or not distributed should not have their own articles, unless their failure was notable per the guidelines. References
|
If you've any changes to the above collapse suggestion, I recommend editing it directly, rather than having multiple copies of it. -- Alex TW 07:24, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
I like where this is heading, but agree there has to be something in there about pilots, which shouldn't have articles until they are actually picked up by a network. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 22:35, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Comment: I somewhat agree that any unsold pilots should've have articles unless they are actually picked up by a network. But they are pilots that have been aired and such, like the Amazon pilot The After which was previously ordered a eight episode season 1, but it was canceled without shooting another episode beyond the pilot. BattleshipMan ( talk) 22:49, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Bumping, in case anyone wants to do anything related to this. I've noticed most discussions here fizzle out and never conclude, which is why we don't have any solid rules and just rely on unwritten "standard practices". -- / Alex/ 21 04:30, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for List of Doctor Who Christmas and New Year's specials to be moved to List of Doctor Who specials. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. This move request covers the scope and intention of the article in question, and could do with some objective eyes from outside the Doctor Who project. Please do take a look if interested, and consider the draft changes at User:U-Mos/sandbox also. U-Mos ( talk) 22:42, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
While dealing with an editor I happened across List of Skatoony episodes which is a bit of a mess. I have no idea what a Skatoony is and I'm still dealing with the death of my wife so I don't have time to fix the article. If anyone is interested in fixing this article, you're welcome to do so. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 04:14, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Red Table Talk#Episodes list. – BoogerD ( talk) 05:56, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the following discussions:
Thanks. TheDoctorWho (talk) 05:23, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mireasă pentru fiul meu season 2 (Romania) . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 12:18, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Star Academy 9 (France) . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 12:18, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:2018 in American television#Split proposal. Regarding a discussion to split one or more sections into standalone articles. TheDoctorWho (talk) 02:34, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
In the discussion around this edit to List of Doctor Who episodes (2005–present), it became clear that MOS:TVNOW is slightly lacking when it comes to fictional television series. Although the section is clear that "references to the show, and its characters and locations, should always be in the present tense", and that "some defunct non-fiction and live programs" may differ from this. This only implies how any participants in the production of a fiction programme (actors, writers, directors etc.) should be referred to, and also ignores previous participants in an ongoing non-fiction/live show (off the top of my head, Jeremy Clarkson's hosting of Top Gear). At the request for comment around this issue, Masem has quite justifiably advocated using the past tense when discussing the previous actors who have played the Doctor from a historical point of view. I believe these matters, that are not in any way unusual, should be covered in the guidelines to ensure consistency across the television WikiProject. U-Mos ( talk) 04:31, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television#Discussion of two WP:BOLD edits at MOS:TVCAST. U-Mos ( talk) 08:27, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
If anyonw is interested, please participate in the discussion over here: Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics#ITV Sources
MiaSays ( talk) 09:46, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Manifest (TV series)#Initials. — YoungForever (talk) 14:27, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
Please could an editor familiar with U.S. TV take a look at Template:Waterman Broadcasting Corporation? An IP editor has expanded it recently, and many of the stations listed there have no obvious connection to Waterman. Thanks, Certes ( talk) 19:01, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
There is currently a proposal up for discussion at Template talk:Infobox television season#Adjusting the header title that users might want to weigh in on. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 17:43, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Big Brother (Albanian TV series)#Requested move 14 January 2019 . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 07:47, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Pinoy Big Brother (season 1)#Requested move 18 January 2019 . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 23:16, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 January 19#Template:Hotel1 . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 06:26, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I've opened a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television#Threshold for inclusion of awards. Short story, I'm trying to figure out what the community requires when deciding whether or not an award should be added to a TV article, and I'd like to encourage specific language be added to the MOS. Your comments there are appreciated. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 23:05, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
I've recently taken a look at {{
Cite episode}} and noticed that the |author=
parameter is being used in different ways by different editors. It would be good if we decide on a standed way for this to be done, and if needed request additional parameters be made available.
A few notes:
-- Gonnym ( talk) 13:53, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
Opinions are needed on the following: Wikipedia talk:Review aggregators#RfC: Should the "As of" template, or some similar wording indicating that the score may have changed over time, be used for review aggregators in articles?. A permalink for it is seen here. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 01:03, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
What are the criteria for including an award in a biographical article? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:33, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
I happened to notice that the page title for the Netflix series A Series of Unfortunate Events claims that it is a TV series. Correct me if I am wrong here but the definition of "TV Series" is "a show that has been made for broadcasting on television" is it not? While Netflix and the show itself may constantly claim the show to be "streaming television" which here should mean "a TV show which is made available on (a) streaming video service(s), specifically those on the internet(as opposed to Cable Video on Demand, though the two are not mutually exclusive as some services provide internet-based Video on Demand directly from cable companies and broadcasters themselves)". If the show was made for, and exclusively streamed on Netflix, then how would it fit the definition of "TV Series" or "streaming television"?
As I was writing this for that show's talk page, I noticed while looking into the matter to be certain, that this site's own article on " television show" claims streaming video counts in the heading but fails to cite any sources. " Web television" also fails to mention the origin of the term or provide any sources for the term itself, mostly mentioning various web services claiming to be TV services, though it also mentions the International Academy of Web Television, which is an article rife with primary sources and a couple of articles that are specifically talking about the "Streamy Awards" which do not in any way validate their use of the term. Also, streaming media claims that the only websites that stream TV Shows are ones like "Hulu and Amazon", while YouTube is mentioned as a site to stream video games in stark contrast to what web television says on the matter. Seems to me that a larger problem is at play here that needs to be addressed, which is why I modified what I said and decided to post it here instead.
I understand that the lines have been blurred a bit in the digital age and that's understandable but clarity between terms exists for a reason and at the very least, as a compromise I would ask that more specific terms such as "streaming television" "webseries" or "Netflix series" should be used in cases like the aforementioned Netflix-exclusive series in spite of my insistence on the term "streaming television" being a misnomer here. Mattwo7 ( talk) 02:02, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Quite some time ago this project made two decisions:
We now have situations such as that at Star Trek: Discovery where the series overview table is not transcluded to the article, raising the potential for duplication errors, which was one of the reasons used to justify transcluding to the main series article. This table also has home media release information in the series overview table which has been cunningly disguised by dumping it in the "Release" section of the article. Have we changed our minds on how such tables are going to be compiled? -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 07:08, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
Correction: Series overview tables would not contain home media release information on the List of Episodes article.- Please cite the discussion where that exception was agreed to. That other articles may do what you say does not make it acceptable. You should know that by now. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 07:19, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
I'm still trying to work out how "we did agree [it] was not appropriate"... I see no issue with the table.- It's a series overview table that incorporates home media release dates. You know very well that's not acceptable. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 08:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
Is episode list necessary for a GA? Is it required? Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 17:20, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi, Currently at
Watership Down_ (miniseries)
the plot is a whopping 12350 words and 71833 characters long - So my question is should the plot remain and be trimmed or should it all be moved to the talkpage (in a collapsible box) so that someone can trim?,
I've added condense tags to each section but I don't really know if this will ever be trimmed or whether it'll just remain as is for all eternity,
I'm undecided on what to do so wanted to seek an opinion or 2,
Many thanks, –
Davey2010
Talk 20:55, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive 61#Need valid source(s) about Viva TV on IBC, which is about a wikipedia that is within the scope of this WikiProject. JSH-alive/ talk/ cont/ mail 11:12, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
There is a request for comment on the reliability of Telesur at the reliable sources noticeboard. If you are interested, please participate at WP:RSN § RfC: Telesur. — Newslinger talk 02:50, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
Suggested adding the option to use either the "executive producer" or "producer" credit for showrunners—depending on the country of origin—in the infobox for television episodes. The discussion can be found here: Template talk:Infobox television episode#Replacing "produced by" credit with executive producer (showrunner) credit. In the United States, the showrunner is the leading executive producer responsible for the creativity and management for a TV series. ATC . Talk 01:38, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
Does anyone watch
Loose Women? It appeared on my radar at the end of January and since then there have been multiple unexplained changes to the presenter
and starring
fields in the infobox,
[13] far more than I've seen with any other TV program. I do not watch this program so I don't know whether these changes have been valid and I was hoping somebody here might be able to clear this up. --
AussieLegend (
✉) 10:33, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Discussions have been raised concerning the accessibility of Doctor Who episode tables; these can be found at Module talk:Episode list#Sandbox version update and Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Accessibility disagreement. Different table suggestions have been put forward on how to fix these accessibility issues, including the use of horizontal rules, the separation of episode-specific information into tabular rows, and the rearranging of the header and table columns. Further opinions would be appreciated. -- / Alex/ 21 13:41, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
It seems like a recent update to Module:Episode list could be the cause. See, for example, List of Sabrina the Teenage Witch episodes#TV films: The film names are in bold, while the episode titles above are not since they're numbered. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 16:18, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
<th>...</th>
tag or the cell scope. -- /
Alex/
21 16:31, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
plainrowheaders
"-type table, so that it doesn't "bold" the first cell of the row... --
IJBall (
contribs •
talk) 17:40, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
There are a number of List of episodes television articles where the template include size has been exceeded, and thus episode tables and further templates aren't rendered on the article, if anyone wants to take a look into them.
-- / Alex/ 21 07:38, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
{{cite
with {{subst:cite
. —
Bilorv
(c)
(talk) 20:43, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
|Viewers=
parameter in a <noinclude>...</noinclude>
tag, without having to introduce a new parameter? That way, it would still appear in the episode table on the season article, next to the viewer number, and not in the episodes article, where it would display as simply the viewer number. -- /
Alex/
21 01:48, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
The article David Remo has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{ prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Peaceray ( talk) 20:04, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
TVBuff90 has added tons of templates for actors to the articles for the TV series in which that actor won the award for; see here for example. As far I know, we don't do that, otherwise an article could literally have hundreds of acting award templates, if we were do this for every award ceremony. If we're not doing this for Emmys, then we definitely shouldn't be doing it for the Saturn Awards. Drovethrughosts ( talk) 13:54, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
The article is a mess, or about to become one. This article is in desperate need of a re-organization.
Do we have any other series which completely switch out... well, everything?
The plot section, cast section, infobox... most sections really is season specific with little or no overlap.
As is the clean approach would be to rename the current page "Altered Carbon (TV series season 1)" or somesuch and then create a duplicate for season two where all of this is replaced by the pertinent S2 info. And then collect the (few) tidbits common to all seasons on "Altered Carbon (TV series)", the master page.
How do we handle this? CapnZapp ( talk) 21:51, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
The article is a mess, or about to become one. This article is in desperate need of a re-organization.Not "will be a mess" or "will be in need". The article can follow the example of the thousands of other television series articles, in which the information for the new season is simply added to the article. No need for separation or some sort of "merge" of the information. -- / Alex/ 21 07:51, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
I was looking at WP:TVSEASON and is there a rule that a name has to be; List of X show (season 1) episodes, List of X show: A new life, List of X show (season 2) episodes, etc. To "X show (season 1), X show: A new life, X show (season 2), etc. Because I don't see how List of High School DxD (season 1) episodes and List of High School DxD New episodes follows "episode" after season? Tainted-wingsz ( talk) 15:10, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nuff said. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 21:31, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
For what it's worth, my comments still stand. An episode table, a ratings table, and a few sentences of a production do not make a season article. There is nothing here that cannot be included in the parent and episodes article. Merge the content and draft the article until it has been expanded. See the recent Arrowverse articles on how to properly develop an article to be ready for the mainspace. Adding onto that, just because other articles exist, does not make it more valid. -- / Alex/ 21 00:16, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
There are 3 articles which seem to be for the exact series, but I'm just not sure - Wide World of Sports (Australian TV series), Nine's Wide World of Sports and World of Sport (Sydney, Australia TV series). Note: None of these is World of Sport (Australian TV program), which is a different program. I'm pretty sure that Wide World of Sports and Nine's Wide World of Sports are the same program, looking at the list of hosts, years and channel, but I can't find any sources online for the Sydney show. Note that IMDB lists only Wide World of Sports and the Melbourne show. Anyone have any ideas what to do? -- Gonnym ( talk) 23:41, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
I've
just posted something to the talk page for the relatively-obscure project template {{
Television home release}}
(total transclusion count across the English Wikpedia: 54, at the time of this writing) which may be of interest to project members. In it, I propose that we remove the wikitable structure from the template entirely. I'd be eager to hear reactions and input from any interested wikipedians. --
FeRDNYC (
talk) 12:06, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Just a heads up, I'm planning on updating the parameter names of Template:Television season ratings, from:
|premiere=
to |startrating=
(to disambiguate between the confusing similar-titled parameters |premiere=
(ratings) and |start=
(date))|finale=
to |endrating=
(to disambiguate between the confusing similar-titled parameters |finale=
(ratings) and |end=
(date))-- / Alex/ 21 00:54, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
|start_rating=
and |end_rating=
. --
Gonnym (
talk) 13:12, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Do these Apple TV series meet the required guidelines to have a standalone article - Untitled Brie Larson CIA drama series, Untitled Damien Chazelle drama series, Untitled M. Night Shyamalan drama series, Untitled Rob McElhenney/Charlie Day comedy series, Untitled Richard Gere drama series, Untitled Simon Kinberg/David Weil science fiction series? All are unnamed and haven't started filming. -- Gonnym ( talk) 00:30, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Some series frequently change timeslots, which is why a parameter to hide the timeslot was added. Similarly, there are some series where their episodes consist of two segments—usually animation—and for one reason or another, rather than airing an episode's segments together, the network will air segments individually (and still label the entire showing as "new," even though the second segment is a repeat). For those cases, I think it would be useful if a parameter to hide the episodes column were added below the "hide_timeslot" parameter. Simply, it would be "hide_episodes." There may be 26 episodes, but if the segments aren't always aired together, that just leads to confusion if you count a segment individually aired as an episode. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 15:56, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment#Télévision à la carte japonaise, the subject of which is within the scope of this WikiProject. JSH-alive/ talk/ cont/ mail 16:52, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
I was wondering if somebody could look at Loose Women#List of episodes. I'm interested in opinions. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 09:34, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
If a writer is credited as "Teleplay by", and there is no "Story by" credit, is that the same as being credited as just "Written by"? -- / Alex/ 21 13:52, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:The Order (TV series)#Country . — YoungForever (talk) 16:05, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
TVBuff90 seems to be re-writing history. He has been removing awards from shows because he does not agree with the award associations as they have changed names. -— Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyTheTiger ( talk • contribs) 15:20, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
For Netflix series that haven't been cancelled but haven't been picked up for a second season yet, do we use present for the end date or do we not include an end date at all? JDDJS ( talk to me • see what I've done) 03:39, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Apple TV, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 23:00, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
There is a new template for cast lists that include a list indicator, at {{ Cast indicator}}, to provide a standard list indicator. The list entries can be customized per the documentation. -- / Alex/ 21 00:43, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
I was wondering if Voltron (1984 TV series) should be renamed Voltron: Defender of the Universe if anybody is interested in this debate go to Talk:Voltron (1984 TV series) and voice your opinion. Dwanyewest ( talk) 09:58, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:ABC's Wide World of Sports is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:ABC's Wide World of Sports until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 00:27, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Aaron Sorkin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Aaron Sorkin until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 02:28, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Friends is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Friends (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 02:47, 26 March 2019 (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 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | → | Archive 35 |
Just a heads up, I've removed a number of "For the current season" links at the top of television series articles. Including such links violates WP:TVGUIDE: "electronic program guide [...]. For example, an article on a broadcaster should not list upcoming events, [...] current schedules." Especially when such links are already available in the article. There's still more to remove per search results. -- Alex TW 00:02, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia articles are not: [...] Directories, directory entries, electronic program guides. Linking the current or next season makes the article the definition of a program directory and guide. For what it's worth, this version is terrible - they linked the draft itself! -- Alex TW 09:33, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
"1) "Broadcaster" in this sense would refer to the channel that the show airs on, not the show itself. A show does not / cannot "broadcast" itself. 2) This is not a "current schedule", it's a useful link to those looking specifically information about the current season. Schedule in this sense, would be "that airs on Friday at 9/8c"". Lastly, agreeing with Whats new? on
I imagine a lot of readers search for the show, land on the series page, but are after the current season. TheDoctorWho (talk) 01:54, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
I imagine a lot of readers search for the show, land on the series page, but are after the current season.Yes, I imagine they are, but we're not here to make things "easy". We're here to list down content correctly. Do we add "For the current season, see List of Riverdale episodes#Season 3 (2018)", or similar section-linked content? No. To list the current season makes it a TV guide. (Also going back to the link that I missed, 2018–19 United States network television schedule is terrible as well.) -- Alex TW 02:12, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
we're not here to make things "easy". We're here to list down content correctly. I think that's a bit harsh. Accuracy is important, but being user friendly should also be a consideration. A hatnote linking to a current season article is very different to linking to a section of a 'List of episodes' article, and is more common in unscripted programs where the season typically has little relevance to the previous one (new contestants, different challenges, etc). I don't see how a simple hatnote rises to the level of becoming a TV guide -- Whats new? (talk) 03:06, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
This is where you have to use common sense and think about things logically vs exaggeration. We're not duplicating links in the sense of repeating the link multiple times in the same paragraph. For some articles the next closest link may be the series overview (after which the reader is taken to the list of episodes article, then has to click another link before being taken to the season article itself). What's the difference of having a link to an actor in the Infobox, and repeating the link in the cast and characters section but not having a hatnote at the top and another link later in the article??? If you want to go as far as removing all duplicate links should we remove all the actor links in the cast and character section (not suggesting this, just attempting to put it in perspective)? TheDoctorWho (talk) 03:24, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
"Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but if helpful for readers, a link may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, hatnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead".
For example, an article on a broadcaster should not list upcoming events, current promotions, current schedules,...which is what you originally quoted in WP:NOTTVGUIDE. The hatnote doesn't list a string of "upcoming events, current promotions" or a "current schedule". -- Whats new? (talk) 06:12, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
"...although mention of major events, promotions or historically significant program lists and schedules may be acceptable."which those articles would likely meet, but that's a side issue in any event -- Whats new? (talk) 06:18, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
The hatnote doesn't list a string of "upcoming events"; then "For the upcoming season ..."If this is your only problem then maybe we need to come up with when it's okay to include a hatnote. Perhaps only adding the hatnote after the season begins similar to how we only update the season number after it begins? TheDoctorWho (talk) 07:39, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
So did we come to a consensus that the hatnotes were beneficial to articles and readers. Just asking so that I can reinstate them on the articles that they were removed from. TheDoctorWho (talk) 03:45, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Alright, I restored a number of the notes before being accused of
WP:HOUNDING by Alex (whatever though, I'm not here to fight that). But in respect, I've stopped and Alex "can and may"
restore the rest "when they get the time"
although, I suppose there's nothing really holding them to that so the notes may be lost in edit histories for a while.
TheDoctorWho
(talk) 13:22, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
So, I was reading
MOS:SECTION recently, and under the guidelines for headings, it states that headers should be unique within a page (otherwise section links may lead to the wrong place, and edit summaries may be ambiguous)
. While reading this, I thought about how a lot of television articles (especially episode lists with ratings) don't follow this. For example,
List of Riverdale episodes, which has two links to each of "Season 1 (2017)", "Season 2 (2017–18)" and "Season 3 (2018)". Given that we often request that editors follow our MoS as strongly as possible, shouldn't we follow other such MoS's? --
Alex
TW 07:06, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
Not redundantly refer [..] to a higher-level heading, unless doing so is shorter or clearer.so using "Season 3 (2018) ratings" would also not be in line with that MoS. -- Gonnym ( talk) 09:15, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
be unique within a page, given that
edit summaries may be ambiguous. -- Alex TW 13:11, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
The reception information should include broadcast ratings and critical response. For broadcast ratings, it may be easier to maintain seasonal averages for the main page, while the season and episode articles could contain a list of ratings for all the episodes. Lists of ratings on episode articles should be included under headers that state the season involved, without a year, to comply with Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Section headings in not having headers duplicate the episode table sections.
And finally, once episode 12 aired on January 7, 2014, it would be changed once again to "Season 11 (2013–14)". Sections for ratings tables on episode articles should only include the season, not a year (see #Reception for more).-- Alex TW 00:22, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
in not having headers duplicate the episode table sections- I'm not comfortable with this wording. The actual aim is to ensure that section headings remain unique. There's nothing in Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Section headings about episode tables and this is likely to confuse some editors. As I said above, we have to dumb some things down and (attempt to) make it so that even editors with poor writing skills are not confused. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 07:08, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
in not having headers duplicate any pre-existing headers? -- Alex TW 08:30, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
How might we clarify the meaning of the terms "television production?" From a production crews perspective there are two working production models commonly used that are different and yet use the same terms. Crews involved in live broadcasts, as in talk shows and sports events are of one type. Crews who produce content made for television broadcast as in dramatic episodic shows and films made for television, use their crafts in a much different way. One model is linear and the other non-linear, and those distinction have been around from the beginning of television broadcasting and documented in many related Wiki articles. The creation and production of a show made for television broadcast and it actual broadcast and syndication has distinct components. The task of an Executive Producer is different when he or she is producing the Olympics broadcasts verses a film made for television verses episodic films. The person scripting each works differently, as do the crafts filming. The most notable difference is in post-production where choices are made on what the audience see and the sound scape. May I suggest that we clarify by saying either "television film production" (meaning all production made in the non-linear mode or "television live production" meaning all productions shot and aired live. Filmedit48 ( talk) 20:43, 29 November 2018 (UTC) http://www.davidpublisher.org/index.php/Home/Article/index?id=33044.html
So, I've complied a list of the WikiProject Television's standard practices:
These are, as far as I know, all unwritten rules that we cannot quote or link to when questioned about them, which makes it hard to implement or execute them. I'm wanting to incorporate them somewhere into the Wiki, so that we can quote or link to when questioned about them. Any practices I've missed, or ideas on where to implement? -- Alex TW 08:36, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
RTitle
use makes sense – in those cases where The Futon Critic has an individual episode press release, that includes additional info such as the director and writers (and guest cast). But Futon doesn't have those for every episode of every series, and in those cases where there's not director/writer info for an upcoming episode, I would agree that an RTitle
is not needed in that case, and a column source is fine... --
IJBall (
contribs •
talk) 16:29, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
I have no strong opinion on 1, 7 or 8. On 2, I'm comfortable with keeping RTitle sources where they're available, just not making them mandatory or expected after airing, but don't see the value in removing them if they've been added. Strongly support 3 and 4. I don't really support 5 - much along the same lines as 2, if a synopsis can be sourced reliabily then I don't see why it can't be added in advance of airing (and Wiki contains spoilers). On 6, I don't know that it is necessary to mandate how many decimals/sig figs should be used across the board, and it should probably be based on a combination of available data and editor discretion. I'd also like to throw into 6 that viewership need not be rounded by millions when all or nearly all episodes are below 1 million viewers (for example, there's no need for ratings figures at List of Animals episodes to be written as 0.239 etc when "millions" is not relevant because no episode gets close - "239,000" would be better in my opinion). -- Whats new? (talk) 22:50, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
"239,000" would be better in my opinion. A great example of this is List of Wentworth episodes. -- Alex TW 00:20, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Support the newly-added 9 FWIW -- Whats new? (talk) 09:21, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Just a heads up about the upcoming Netflix Dracula series and its respective articles. The series not yet gone into production, and thus is too early for a separate article, per the consensus of WP:TV on the early existence of series articles. The series now has links at Dracula (upcoming miniseries) and Dracula (2020 TV series) (both redirects to Dracula in popular culture#Television), as well as Draft:Dracula (upcoming miniseries) and Draft:Dracula (2020 TV series) (the current location of the draft with correct disambiguation). The number of links is due to an editor moving the article to mainspace locations with incorrect disambiguation despite a lack of production commencement. -- Alex TW 02:01, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Gran Hermano 1 (Spain)#Requested move 1 December 2018 . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 13:02, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Queen America#Guest stars and recurring. — Lbtocth talk 23:21, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Giant Robo (OVA)#Requested move 5 December 2018. This is a requested move looking to establish a consensus on how to name "OVA" series-type anime titles. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 00:29, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Secret Story 1 (Portugal)#Requested move 5 December 2018 . This move request involves a proposal to use a new disambig tag for article titles not currently in use by WP:NCTV. Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 19:10, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Template:Big Brother housemates, Template:Big Brother endgame and Template:Big Brother endgame2 has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox television season. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 20:10, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
How should we split, and clean up, Food Paradise? Please join the discussion at Talk:Food Paradise#Page size, and help. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:37, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2018_December_4#1960–61_United_States_network_television_schedule_(Saturday_morning)), which is about a wikipedia that is within the scope of this WikiProject. Levivich ( talk) 00:51, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/1980–81_United_States_network_television_schedule_(Saturday_morning) , which is about a wikipedia that is within the scope of this WikiProject. Levivich ( talk) 00:51, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Can I get some opinions on the layout of Template:The Big Bang Theory? We shouldn't be forcing templates to do what they're not designed to do, such as forcing empty sections with only a header link, because when a header link is provided but there's no content, the section hides by default. I have previously attempted to change the layout to be more user-friendly and in-line with the actual template:
Thoughts? Alternate layouts? -- Alex TW 01:55, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Secret Story 2010 (Greece) . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 19:22, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Survivor VIP (Israel) appeared on my radar recently when it was added to Category:2019 Israeli television seasons which shouldn't exist yet as no episodes have aired yet in 2019, it still being 2018. I've raised that issue previously, at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television/Archive 19#Category:2015 television seasons but the categories keep getting populated year after year, months before any episodes have aired and well before the year has even started. However, that's actually tangential to this. There's not a single reference in Survivor VIP (Israel), just a lot of premature tables. I'd normally take action on this article myself but I'm involved in a discussion at Category talk:2019 television seasons#Speedy deletion request so I'd appreciate involvement/comment from others. There is also a comment from Katanin in an edit summary about better naming conventions for "these" pages, [1] so that is probably something that needs addressing as well. The previous seasons are named a little bit inconsistently. For example, Survivor (Israel): VIP is called "Survivor 10: V.I.P" in the lede and is stated to be the 6th season. I'm really not sure what is going on with this series. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 16:43, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
If there are multiple shows of the same name, include the disambiguation, similar to the above for TV series in the season description, for example, "The Apprentice (U.S. season 1)" and "The Apprentice (UK series one)". Not following this with survivor is the controversial, non-consensus way. -- Gonnym ( talk) 13:05, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Les Misérables (2018 TV series)#Article title instability. Should Les Misérables be disambiguated as (2018 TV series) or (2018 miniseries)? -- Alex TW 14:34, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Note that this issue has been raised before with zero participation, so I am avoiding the standard template message which has already been cluttering up this page. Modernponderer ( talk) 08:29, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
AlexTheWhovian & I are having an update episode count dispute. When did it became ok to update episode count BEFORE the new episode airing time? According to MOS:TV and (here) WP:TV, we don't update episode count until a new episode begins airing. WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL — Lbtocth talk 15:50, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
It looks like Alex was reverted because he updated the episode count a minute(Though most likely less considering Wikipedia doesn't record seconds) before said episode aired. That's absurd, I've seen plenty of pages where editors don't even bother to update for weeks if not months. I'm left to update(Though I often forget) when I'm adding the numbers for the cable show in question. How such a non issue has become an issue is ridiculous, at least someone makes the effort to update the episode counts. Esuka323 ( talk) 19:44, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Alex was reverted because he updated the episode count a minute(Though most likely less considering Wikipedia doesn't record seconds) before said episode aired. That's absurdExactly my point, thank you. It was a matter of seconds; by the time Lbtocth had an issue with it, it was already well into airing. It's being pedantic to demand it exactly on time. I update 8/7c series at 11.30am my time - my clock was out by a few seconds, what's the big deal? -- Alex TW 23:22, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Many programmes begin airing before the literal minute at which they are scheduled to begin. But even if you are certain that an episode has not aired in any location, reverting seconds before broadcast is not appropriate. Consider WP:IAR, WP:COMMONSENSE and the intent behind the policy to update after an episode airs, not its exact wording. — Bilorv (c) (talk) 20:25, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Bilorv, I know I probably shouldn't have reverted. I am in the wrong in that. But, when did it became ok to update episode count BEFORE the new episode airing time? Because when I done that I got reverted by veteran editors. — Lbtocth talk 20:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
How about updating when the episode has completed broadcasting in its primary market? Then it resolves any issues of it being interrupted by other programming. For streamed releases, this should be as soon as it has officially released. AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 23:42, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
|num_episodes=
can only be updated after an episode airs even though there are plenty of sources with the entire schedule for all 13 episodes?? If this is the case this will most likely cause an unnecessary dispute with that article when it starts using {{
Infobox television season}} instead of {{
Big Brother housemates}}.
Alucard 16
❯❯❯ chat? 23:49, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
|num_episodes=
on the season page even if it has been confirmed the number of episodes for the season. See
The Flash (season 5), we don't put 22 episodes on it. On the Series Overview, you can with a reliable source. See
List of The Flash episodes#Series overview. —
Lbtocth
talk 00:05, 11 December 2018 (UTC)|num_episodes=
. Such as like Netflix originals. —
Lbtocth
talk 00:22, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Do we use the 7-day or 28-day data from BARB? If a series of a long-running show has started before four-screen dashboard is available do we use the same data but from the new source? Ratings at Holby City (series 20) haven't been updated since September so quite a few episodes lack the data. The latest Doctor Who series uses a total 7-day data whereas the aforementioned Holby City article used 28-day TV-only data. Matt14451 ( talk) 16:05, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
I would say we should use 7-day TV-only data in episode tables as this is the metric that's "industry-agreed" according to BARB - [11]. This would go against both examples above. Matt14451 ( talk) 16:50, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Live +28 day ratings seem a little redundant. Most viewers watch a show within the first three to seven days, so the gains are negligible. Nielsen for example reports beyond the usual seven days, but press releases with +30 viewing from networks seem like, pointless. But I admit I'm not too familiar with UK viewing habits and my thoughts were more Nielsen related.
For example with Nielsen ratings, the C3 & C7 ratings are more important to networks, but they are generally at the same level as L+SD because people who DVR shows don't watch the commercials. I think if you're going to go with any sort of standard for UK ratings, you should go for the one that's more important. Esuka323 ( talk) 22:45, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Every Doctor Who season/series article always includes L+7, as it's typically the only reported statistic: This was true until August 2018, when BARB changed their reported data. Hence why it's the standard on Doctor Who, because it would only be possible to use the four-screen dashboard for series 11. This isn't a reason to use L+7 in the future, for instance on shows which begin in 2018 or later. (I agree that we shouldn't conflate two different types of data in one table; or if lack of data means we have to, this needs a footnote.) — Bilorv (c) (talk) 11:09, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
overnight / 7 day data can be mixed without issue, that's not what occurs in UK articles, or US for that matter, as articles on US series combine the data using {{ Television episode ratings}}, and only overnight is ever used in the episode tables. US articles never have replacements occurring in episode tables for viewers. -- Alex TW 23:29, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
BARB is reporting both L+7 and L+28. How they report it is irrelevant; they always have, they still are, and they likely will continue to always do so. -- Alex TW 13:15, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
If interested, please share your opinion on the Rfc on Character Names in plot summaries. Jauerback dude?/ dude.
Thought I would make all who follow this page aware of the deletion discussion occurring over two upcoming episodes of the television series Into the Dark. The discussion is happening here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Body (Into the Dark).
So, the American cable channel CourtTV, which has ultimately become TruTV, is set to relaunch in May 2019... as a "new" (old?!) cable channel, according to this article. So, IOW, TruTV will continue to exist, but CourtTV will now exist again as well!
Needless to say, this will be somewhat of a mess, necessitating a new article (eventually) at CourtTV (likely with a hatnote) rather than just the current redirect to TruTV.
Just posting this as a heads up to the denizens of WP:TV. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 22:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego? (TV show)#Requested move 16 December 2018. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 14:22, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
There is an ongoing discussion that may be of interest to the members of this board at Talk:Neil_deGrasse_Tyson#Text_proposals. ResultingConstant ( talk) 18:22, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi all, what are the guidelines for adding television programs and actors to articles? At
Bepannah and
Harshad Chopda, there have been numerous attempts to add SBS Telebration Awards and Asian Viewers Television Awards, neither of which have articles at Wikipedia. One of the editors who added it in good faith wrote in defense: "Telebrations is an award show to appreciate ITV talent. It is held by ABP News which is one of India's leading news channels. It has been held for around 10 years. More importantly, fans vote for it. Secondly, AVTA is an Asian Television award show in which the fans nominate and vote ... These aren't random award mills or weebly awards."
There's nothing at MOS:TV that would clearly indicate what to do in a situation like this, so I'm curious what the prevailing community attitude would for something like this. Do we add them? I don't know if these awards are televised or anything.
Cyphoidbomb (
talk) 15:50, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the AFD on this related subject. Jhenderson 777 05:08, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Big Brother 1 (UK)#Requested move 22 December 2018 . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 12:31, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Big Brother 1 (U.S.)#Requested move 22 December 2018 . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 12:31, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
I have suggested that a new WikiProject that may be of relevance to this one, be created. If you are interested in viewing the proposal or taking part in the discussion, please see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Fuller_House. mrwoogi010 Talk 23:48, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:New Warriors (TV series)#The end of the year. — Lbtocth talk 04:49, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television)#RfC on using US or U.S.. -- Whats new? (talk) 05:31, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
I'm not thrilled to what Pigsonthewing has been doing to the infoboxes, like he tried to merge Template:Infobox television season and Template:Infobox television episode into Template:Infobox television. That's unacceptable and a lot of users oppose this for the right reasons. BattleshipMan ( talk) 22:23, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
There is a discussion at MOS:TV that would probably benefit from input by editors from this project. The title is Bulletizing episode summaries at Who Is America?. However it involves bulletising summaries in all articles. Please participate but note that an admin has imposed a time limit of one week. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 19:21, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Who Is America?#Plot Summaries. – BoogerD ( talk) 22:26, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
How do we currently stand on splitting out episode lists? Normally I'd support splitting the episodes from a series article with 15 seasons to a separate LoE page but this unexplained, unattributed split has turned Tanked into little more than a stub as the episode list was virtually the entire article. All that is left now is the lede and infobox. The episode list is incomplete, with many episode summaries missing, so I really don't see a problem in this case having all of the episodes in the main article. What is everyones' opinion for these articles? -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 10:48, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
Yikes, I think the changes should be reverted if the editor isn't willing to put in the effort to expand the main article. There's enough information floating around for any reality show to pad an article out. It just takes someone willing and able to do the work to make such substantial contributions to the page. I think the question also needs to be asked, what benefit does the series having a "List of episodes" page really have? Because it's just empty tables with ratings information. Esuka323 ( talk) 22:37, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Twin Peaks (2017 TV series)#Requested move 1 January 2019. -- Wikipedical ( talk) 23:24, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
A recent discussion at Talk:Homecoming (TV series) determined that the "Camera" infobox field was inappropriately sourced to the TV show itself, which constitutes WP:OR. An editor pointed out that this parameter is widely used and usually unsourced, which means that it may need to be removed from a large number of articles if sourcing cannot be found. Posting here so that folks are aware of this consensus and the reason for these removals. – dlthewave ☎ 02:23, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi,i'm here to dicuss that there isn't a season 6 yet.I also added some summaries for the 18 19 and 20th episodes of season 5-- Tophat566 ( talk) 00:17, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
Continuing on from the above discussion, I have taken WP:NFF and copy-edited it to fit television series (see below). Should it be listed at WP:NFTV (Notability for Future Television Series), or added onto WP:TVSHOW? Perhaps added onto the end of it as a subsection, and WP:NFTV redirects to that subsection?
Rewording of NFTV
|
---|
Television series that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles, as budget issues, scripting issues and casting issues can interfere with a project well ahead of its intended seriesing date. The assumption should also not be made that because a series is likely to be a high-profile release it will be immune to setbacks—there is no "sure thing" production. Until the start of principal photography, information on the series might be included in articles about its subject material, if available. Sources must be used to confirm the start of principal photography after shooting has begun. In the case of animated series, reliable sources must confirm that the series is clearly out of the pre-production process, meaning that the final animation frames are actively being drawn and/or rendered, and final recordings of voice-overs and music have commenced. [1] Additionally, series that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released, should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines. Similarly, series produced in the past which were either not completed or not distributed should not have their own articles, unless their failure was notable per the guidelines. References
|
If you've any changes to the above collapse suggestion, I recommend editing it directly, rather than having multiple copies of it. -- Alex TW 07:24, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
I like where this is heading, but agree there has to be something in there about pilots, which shouldn't have articles until they are actually picked up by a network. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 22:35, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Comment: I somewhat agree that any unsold pilots should've have articles unless they are actually picked up by a network. But they are pilots that have been aired and such, like the Amazon pilot The After which was previously ordered a eight episode season 1, but it was canceled without shooting another episode beyond the pilot. BattleshipMan ( talk) 22:49, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Bumping, in case anyone wants to do anything related to this. I've noticed most discussions here fizzle out and never conclude, which is why we don't have any solid rules and just rely on unwritten "standard practices". -- / Alex/ 21 04:30, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for List of Doctor Who Christmas and New Year's specials to be moved to List of Doctor Who specials. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. This move request covers the scope and intention of the article in question, and could do with some objective eyes from outside the Doctor Who project. Please do take a look if interested, and consider the draft changes at User:U-Mos/sandbox also. U-Mos ( talk) 22:42, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
While dealing with an editor I happened across List of Skatoony episodes which is a bit of a mess. I have no idea what a Skatoony is and I'm still dealing with the death of my wife so I don't have time to fix the article. If anyone is interested in fixing this article, you're welcome to do so. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 04:14, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Red Table Talk#Episodes list. – BoogerD ( talk) 05:56, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the following discussions:
Thanks. TheDoctorWho (talk) 05:23, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mireasă pentru fiul meu season 2 (Romania) . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 12:18, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Star Academy 9 (France) . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 12:18, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:2018 in American television#Split proposal. Regarding a discussion to split one or more sections into standalone articles. TheDoctorWho (talk) 02:34, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
In the discussion around this edit to List of Doctor Who episodes (2005–present), it became clear that MOS:TVNOW is slightly lacking when it comes to fictional television series. Although the section is clear that "references to the show, and its characters and locations, should always be in the present tense", and that "some defunct non-fiction and live programs" may differ from this. This only implies how any participants in the production of a fiction programme (actors, writers, directors etc.) should be referred to, and also ignores previous participants in an ongoing non-fiction/live show (off the top of my head, Jeremy Clarkson's hosting of Top Gear). At the request for comment around this issue, Masem has quite justifiably advocated using the past tense when discussing the previous actors who have played the Doctor from a historical point of view. I believe these matters, that are not in any way unusual, should be covered in the guidelines to ensure consistency across the television WikiProject. U-Mos ( talk) 04:31, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television#Discussion of two WP:BOLD edits at MOS:TVCAST. U-Mos ( talk) 08:27, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
If anyonw is interested, please participate in the discussion over here: Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics#ITV Sources
MiaSays ( talk) 09:46, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Manifest (TV series)#Initials. — YoungForever (talk) 14:27, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
Please could an editor familiar with U.S. TV take a look at Template:Waterman Broadcasting Corporation? An IP editor has expanded it recently, and many of the stations listed there have no obvious connection to Waterman. Thanks, Certes ( talk) 19:01, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
There is currently a proposal up for discussion at Template talk:Infobox television season#Adjusting the header title that users might want to weigh in on. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 17:43, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Big Brother (Albanian TV series)#Requested move 14 January 2019 . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 07:47, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Pinoy Big Brother (season 1)#Requested move 18 January 2019 . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 23:16, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 January 19#Template:Hotel1 . Alucard 16 ❯❯❯ chat? 06:26, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I've opened a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television#Threshold for inclusion of awards. Short story, I'm trying to figure out what the community requires when deciding whether or not an award should be added to a TV article, and I'd like to encourage specific language be added to the MOS. Your comments there are appreciated. Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 23:05, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
I've recently taken a look at {{
Cite episode}} and noticed that the |author=
parameter is being used in different ways by different editors. It would be good if we decide on a standed way for this to be done, and if needed request additional parameters be made available.
A few notes:
-- Gonnym ( talk) 13:53, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
Opinions are needed on the following: Wikipedia talk:Review aggregators#RfC: Should the "As of" template, or some similar wording indicating that the score may have changed over time, be used for review aggregators in articles?. A permalink for it is seen here. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 01:03, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
What are the criteria for including an award in a biographical article? Cyphoidbomb ( talk) 16:33, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
I happened to notice that the page title for the Netflix series A Series of Unfortunate Events claims that it is a TV series. Correct me if I am wrong here but the definition of "TV Series" is "a show that has been made for broadcasting on television" is it not? While Netflix and the show itself may constantly claim the show to be "streaming television" which here should mean "a TV show which is made available on (a) streaming video service(s), specifically those on the internet(as opposed to Cable Video on Demand, though the two are not mutually exclusive as some services provide internet-based Video on Demand directly from cable companies and broadcasters themselves)". If the show was made for, and exclusively streamed on Netflix, then how would it fit the definition of "TV Series" or "streaming television"?
As I was writing this for that show's talk page, I noticed while looking into the matter to be certain, that this site's own article on " television show" claims streaming video counts in the heading but fails to cite any sources. " Web television" also fails to mention the origin of the term or provide any sources for the term itself, mostly mentioning various web services claiming to be TV services, though it also mentions the International Academy of Web Television, which is an article rife with primary sources and a couple of articles that are specifically talking about the "Streamy Awards" which do not in any way validate their use of the term. Also, streaming media claims that the only websites that stream TV Shows are ones like "Hulu and Amazon", while YouTube is mentioned as a site to stream video games in stark contrast to what web television says on the matter. Seems to me that a larger problem is at play here that needs to be addressed, which is why I modified what I said and decided to post it here instead.
I understand that the lines have been blurred a bit in the digital age and that's understandable but clarity between terms exists for a reason and at the very least, as a compromise I would ask that more specific terms such as "streaming television" "webseries" or "Netflix series" should be used in cases like the aforementioned Netflix-exclusive series in spite of my insistence on the term "streaming television" being a misnomer here. Mattwo7 ( talk) 02:02, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Quite some time ago this project made two decisions:
We now have situations such as that at Star Trek: Discovery where the series overview table is not transcluded to the article, raising the potential for duplication errors, which was one of the reasons used to justify transcluding to the main series article. This table also has home media release information in the series overview table which has been cunningly disguised by dumping it in the "Release" section of the article. Have we changed our minds on how such tables are going to be compiled? -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 07:08, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
Correction: Series overview tables would not contain home media release information on the List of Episodes article.- Please cite the discussion where that exception was agreed to. That other articles may do what you say does not make it acceptable. You should know that by now. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 07:19, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
I'm still trying to work out how "we did agree [it] was not appropriate"... I see no issue with the table.- It's a series overview table that incorporates home media release dates. You know very well that's not acceptable. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 08:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
Is episode list necessary for a GA? Is it required? Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 17:20, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi, Currently at
Watership Down_ (miniseries)
the plot is a whopping 12350 words and 71833 characters long - So my question is should the plot remain and be trimmed or should it all be moved to the talkpage (in a collapsible box) so that someone can trim?,
I've added condense tags to each section but I don't really know if this will ever be trimmed or whether it'll just remain as is for all eternity,
I'm undecided on what to do so wanted to seek an opinion or 2,
Many thanks, –
Davey2010
Talk 20:55, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive 61#Need valid source(s) about Viva TV on IBC, which is about a wikipedia that is within the scope of this WikiProject. JSH-alive/ talk/ cont/ mail 11:12, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
There is a request for comment on the reliability of Telesur at the reliable sources noticeboard. If you are interested, please participate at WP:RSN § RfC: Telesur. — Newslinger talk 02:50, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
Suggested adding the option to use either the "executive producer" or "producer" credit for showrunners—depending on the country of origin—in the infobox for television episodes. The discussion can be found here: Template talk:Infobox television episode#Replacing "produced by" credit with executive producer (showrunner) credit. In the United States, the showrunner is the leading executive producer responsible for the creativity and management for a TV series. ATC . Talk 01:38, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
Does anyone watch
Loose Women? It appeared on my radar at the end of January and since then there have been multiple unexplained changes to the presenter
and starring
fields in the infobox,
[13] far more than I've seen with any other TV program. I do not watch this program so I don't know whether these changes have been valid and I was hoping somebody here might be able to clear this up. --
AussieLegend (
✉) 10:33, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Discussions have been raised concerning the accessibility of Doctor Who episode tables; these can be found at Module talk:Episode list#Sandbox version update and Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Accessibility disagreement. Different table suggestions have been put forward on how to fix these accessibility issues, including the use of horizontal rules, the separation of episode-specific information into tabular rows, and the rearranging of the header and table columns. Further opinions would be appreciated. -- / Alex/ 21 13:41, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
It seems like a recent update to Module:Episode list could be the cause. See, for example, List of Sabrina the Teenage Witch episodes#TV films: The film names are in bold, while the episode titles above are not since they're numbered. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 16:18, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
<th>...</th>
tag or the cell scope. -- /
Alex/
21 16:31, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
plainrowheaders
"-type table, so that it doesn't "bold" the first cell of the row... --
IJBall (
contribs •
talk) 17:40, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
There are a number of List of episodes television articles where the template include size has been exceeded, and thus episode tables and further templates aren't rendered on the article, if anyone wants to take a look into them.
-- / Alex/ 21 07:38, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
{{cite
with {{subst:cite
. —
Bilorv
(c)
(talk) 20:43, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
|Viewers=
parameter in a <noinclude>...</noinclude>
tag, without having to introduce a new parameter? That way, it would still appear in the episode table on the season article, next to the viewer number, and not in the episodes article, where it would display as simply the viewer number. -- /
Alex/
21 01:48, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
The article David Remo has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{ prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Peaceray ( talk) 20:04, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
TVBuff90 has added tons of templates for actors to the articles for the TV series in which that actor won the award for; see here for example. As far I know, we don't do that, otherwise an article could literally have hundreds of acting award templates, if we were do this for every award ceremony. If we're not doing this for Emmys, then we definitely shouldn't be doing it for the Saturn Awards. Drovethrughosts ( talk) 13:54, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
The article is a mess, or about to become one. This article is in desperate need of a re-organization.
Do we have any other series which completely switch out... well, everything?
The plot section, cast section, infobox... most sections really is season specific with little or no overlap.
As is the clean approach would be to rename the current page "Altered Carbon (TV series season 1)" or somesuch and then create a duplicate for season two where all of this is replaced by the pertinent S2 info. And then collect the (few) tidbits common to all seasons on "Altered Carbon (TV series)", the master page.
How do we handle this? CapnZapp ( talk) 21:51, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
The article is a mess, or about to become one. This article is in desperate need of a re-organization.Not "will be a mess" or "will be in need". The article can follow the example of the thousands of other television series articles, in which the information for the new season is simply added to the article. No need for separation or some sort of "merge" of the information. -- / Alex/ 21 07:51, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
I was looking at WP:TVSEASON and is there a rule that a name has to be; List of X show (season 1) episodes, List of X show: A new life, List of X show (season 2) episodes, etc. To "X show (season 1), X show: A new life, X show (season 2), etc. Because I don't see how List of High School DxD (season 1) episodes and List of High School DxD New episodes follows "episode" after season? Tainted-wingsz ( talk) 15:10, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nuff said. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 21:31, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
For what it's worth, my comments still stand. An episode table, a ratings table, and a few sentences of a production do not make a season article. There is nothing here that cannot be included in the parent and episodes article. Merge the content and draft the article until it has been expanded. See the recent Arrowverse articles on how to properly develop an article to be ready for the mainspace. Adding onto that, just because other articles exist, does not make it more valid. -- / Alex/ 21 00:16, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
There are 3 articles which seem to be for the exact series, but I'm just not sure - Wide World of Sports (Australian TV series), Nine's Wide World of Sports and World of Sport (Sydney, Australia TV series). Note: None of these is World of Sport (Australian TV program), which is a different program. I'm pretty sure that Wide World of Sports and Nine's Wide World of Sports are the same program, looking at the list of hosts, years and channel, but I can't find any sources online for the Sydney show. Note that IMDB lists only Wide World of Sports and the Melbourne show. Anyone have any ideas what to do? -- Gonnym ( talk) 23:41, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
I've
just posted something to the talk page for the relatively-obscure project template {{
Television home release}}
(total transclusion count across the English Wikpedia: 54, at the time of this writing) which may be of interest to project members. In it, I propose that we remove the wikitable structure from the template entirely. I'd be eager to hear reactions and input from any interested wikipedians. --
FeRDNYC (
talk) 12:06, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Just a heads up, I'm planning on updating the parameter names of Template:Television season ratings, from:
|premiere=
to |startrating=
(to disambiguate between the confusing similar-titled parameters |premiere=
(ratings) and |start=
(date))|finale=
to |endrating=
(to disambiguate between the confusing similar-titled parameters |finale=
(ratings) and |end=
(date))-- / Alex/ 21 00:54, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
|start_rating=
and |end_rating=
. --
Gonnym (
talk) 13:12, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Do these Apple TV series meet the required guidelines to have a standalone article - Untitled Brie Larson CIA drama series, Untitled Damien Chazelle drama series, Untitled M. Night Shyamalan drama series, Untitled Rob McElhenney/Charlie Day comedy series, Untitled Richard Gere drama series, Untitled Simon Kinberg/David Weil science fiction series? All are unnamed and haven't started filming. -- Gonnym ( talk) 00:30, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Some series frequently change timeslots, which is why a parameter to hide the timeslot was added. Similarly, there are some series where their episodes consist of two segments—usually animation—and for one reason or another, rather than airing an episode's segments together, the network will air segments individually (and still label the entire showing as "new," even though the second segment is a repeat). For those cases, I think it would be useful if a parameter to hide the episodes column were added below the "hide_timeslot" parameter. Simply, it would be "hide_episodes." There may be 26 episodes, but if the segments aren't always aired together, that just leads to confusion if you count a segment individually aired as an episode. Amaury ( talk | contribs) 15:56, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment#Télévision à la carte japonaise, the subject of which is within the scope of this WikiProject. JSH-alive/ talk/ cont/ mail 16:52, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
I was wondering if somebody could look at Loose Women#List of episodes. I'm interested in opinions. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 09:34, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
If a writer is credited as "Teleplay by", and there is no "Story by" credit, is that the same as being credited as just "Written by"? -- / Alex/ 21 13:52, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:The Order (TV series)#Country . — YoungForever (talk) 16:05, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
TVBuff90 seems to be re-writing history. He has been removing awards from shows because he does not agree with the award associations as they have changed names. -— Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyTheTiger ( talk • contribs) 15:20, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
For Netflix series that haven't been cancelled but haven't been picked up for a second season yet, do we use present for the end date or do we not include an end date at all? JDDJS ( talk to me • see what I've done) 03:39, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Apple TV, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 23:00, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
There is a new template for cast lists that include a list indicator, at {{ Cast indicator}}, to provide a standard list indicator. The list entries can be customized per the documentation. -- / Alex/ 21 00:43, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
I was wondering if Voltron (1984 TV series) should be renamed Voltron: Defender of the Universe if anybody is interested in this debate go to Talk:Voltron (1984 TV series) and voice your opinion. Dwanyewest ( talk) 09:58, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:ABC's Wide World of Sports is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:ABC's Wide World of Sports until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 00:27, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Aaron Sorkin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Aaron Sorkin until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 02:28, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Friends is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Friends (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America 1000 02:47, 26 March 2019 (UTC)