Wikipedia

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→"Audience Says"?: User scores are fundamentally unreliable.
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television/Archive 14) (bot
 
(34 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown)
Line 11:
{{WikiProject banner shell|
{{WikiProject Manual of Style}}
{{WikiProject Television|class=Project|importance=NA}}
}}
{{archives|search=yes|index=./Archive index|auto=long|bot=MiszaBot II|age=2|units=months}}
Line 23:
__TOC__
 
== ListsGuidance ofon episodescharacters' placednames in seasonsthe byplot year categoriessummary? ==
 
Hello all,
I noticed that some TV series that are not divided into seasons have episode lists that are sorted into season categories by year. These are mostly anime series. What is the policy/consensus on this? As far as I can see, not all (0-season series) episode lists are organized this way, especially regular live action miniseries. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Death_Note_episodes&diff=prev&oldid=1239320832 I've removed some of them] from these categories, but I've noticed that there are still quite a few such lists in those categories. Personally, I find it odd to sporadically see "list of episodes" articles next to numbered season articles; if the creators of a TV series don't position it as seasons and don't break it down into separate units, then we shouldn't be making it up on Wikipedia and calling it seasons. [[User:Solidest|Solidest]] ([[User talk:Solidest|talk]]) 16:53, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
 
Recently was comparing [[MOS:FILMPLOT]] and [[MOS:TVPLOT|the TV MOS guidance on plot sections]] and noticed that, while the movie MOS provides guidance on whether or not to include actors' names in the plot summary, this article does not. I don't mind either way, but was just look for some clarity.
:Ah, the good 'ol anime articles. The issue with those is that [[List of Death Note episodes]] is actually {{em|not}} a list of episodes article, but the main TV series article page and should be titled [[Death Note (TV series)]]. A group have anime editors have been actively resisting this for years. [[User:Gonnym|Gonnym]] ([[User talk:Gonnym|talk]]) 17:13, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
 
Thanks so much! Have a great day!
::Well, in both cases that doesn't make it an article about the season, right? [[User:Solidest|Solidest]] ([[User talk:Solidest|talk]]) 20:09, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
 
[[User:JuxtaposedJacob|JuxtaposedJacob]] ([[User talk:JuxtaposedJacob|talk]]) | :) | 19:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
== First sentence ==
 
:[[MOS:TVPLOT]] does include this guidance. ("{{tq|Also avoid information that belongs in other sections, such as actors' names.}}") It is much less visible than the same sentiment in [[MOS:FILMPLOT]] though, and TVPLOT might benefit from emulating FILMPLOT's placement and wording. [[User:Danbloch|Dan Bloch]] ([[User talk:Danbloch|talk]]) 00:45, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
I would like to suggest that something along the lines of [[MOS:FILMLEAD]] should be included in the Lead section here, so that we have consistency in what is presented particularly in the first sentence, such as the date of first release. [[User:Laterthanyouthink|Laterthanyouthink]] ([[User talk:Laterthanyouthink|talk]]) 23:57, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
::Ahh, I see.
::I made the sentence more prominent, but not sure if it should stay exactly like I have it - change it if you feel it could be improved.
::Thanks! Have a good day!
::[[User:JuxtaposedJacob|JuxtaposedJacob]] ([[User talk:JuxtaposedJacob|talk]]) | :) | 01:21, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
 
== Episode Count in Infobox ==
:There is an example in [[MOS:TVLEAD]] but that is not similar to what most pages I see use. I agree that a more consistent style would be much more helpful for the project. If this has consensus, the MoS should take into account TV series, season, and episode leads. [[User:Gonnym|Gonnym]] ([[User talk:Gonnym|talk]]) 07:12, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
::The particular post above was concerning adding the release year into the first paragraph of the lead; i.e. "''Fallout'' is a 2024 American post-apocalyptic drama television series". This, I would disagree with. -- [[User:Alex 21|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#02B">Alex_</span><span style="font-size:smaller;color:#02B">21</span>]]<sub>&nbsp;[[User talk:Alex 21|<span style="font-size:xx-small;color:#009">TALK</span>]]</sub> 07:44, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
:::Why can't a release year be added? ''[[Arrow (TV series)]]'' has {{tq|The series premiered in the United States on The CW on October 10, 2012, and ran for eight seasons until January 28, 2020}}. I agree that the date shouldn't be the 4th word in the lead, but it should still be in the first paragraph of the lead. [[User:Gonnym|Gonnym]] ([[User talk:Gonnym|talk]]) 07:48, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
::::''That'' is fine, since it gives explicit detail on the release span, and isn't just the premiere year. The above suggestion concerned ''also'' adding the year immediately in front of what type of television series it is. As far as I've come across, many articles (including ''[[Fallout (American TV series)|Fallout]]'') follow the standard of listing the premiere date as the first sentence of the final paragraph of the lead, since it follows all production information. -- [[User:Alex 21|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#02B">Alex_</span><span style="font-size:smaller;color:#02B">21</span>]]<sub>&nbsp;[[User talk:Alex 21|<span style="font-size:xx-small;color:#009">TALK</span>]]</sub> 08:00, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
:::::Let's wait for the full discussion to be completed and consensus reached on the MOS talk page. I am always happy to abide by consensus but do not agree with editors reverting my changes just because they think their idea is better. Pretty much every TV series I see includes at least the year of first release in the first or second sentence, sometimes repeating the precise date(s) further down the lead if the lead is a long one. [[User:Laterthanyouthink|Laterthanyouthink]] ([[User talk:Laterthanyouthink|talk]]) 08:58, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
::::::Your edits were reverted by multiple editors as they were made without any TV-related guideline cited; they were made simply because you thought your idea was better. Could you please cite this list of "every TV series" you've seen? Any article with repeated content should be promptly fixed. -- [[User:Alex 21|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#02B">Alex_</span><span style="font-size:smaller;color:#02B">21</span>]]<sub>&nbsp;[[User talk:Alex 21|<span style="font-size:xx-small;color:#009">TALK</span>]]</sub> 10:02, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
:::::::TV series leads pretty much always include a full premiere date already. In an edit like [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Wheel_of_Time_(TV_series)&diff=prev&oldid=1239772036 this], the release year added to the first sentence reads as especially redundant because the full premiere date is already noted in the third sentence (albeit the start of a new paragraph). We often see full start and end dates in the first sentence for completed series like ''[[Seinfeld]]'' or ''[[The West Wing]]'', probably because the duration is itself defining, but for ongoing series which lacks an end date this info tends to be included later in the lead.— [[User:TAnthony|TAnthony]]<sup>[[User Talk:TAnthony|Talk]]</sup> 14:34, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
::::::::I don't think a single year should be added to the first sentence of the lead in a similar way that [[MOS:FILMLEAD]] allows because it's an apples to oranges situation. Only a handful of series, presently, release all episodes at once on a single day, in a single year. But the vast majority release their episodes over multiple days (sometimes within the same calendar year) and over multiple years (be it network series from September to May, or multiple seasons over multiple years). Most series account for this in some way with a sentence highlighting the release cadence in the lead. I personally prefer it in the third or fourth paragraph of the lead, but others could chose to have it in the first paragraph. It just shouldn't be in the very first sentence or one of the very first elements of that sentence. - [[User:Favre1fan93|Favre1fan93]] ([[User talk:Favre1fan93|talk]]) 21:21, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
 
Quick question because a few of us have disagreed over on [[Wizards Beyond Waverly Place]]. Two episodes aired on Disney Channel on October 29. Six hours later the first 9 episodes released on Disney+. Two more episodes aired on DC the next day, and from here on out they'll air weekly. Once caught up, Disney+ is set to release additional episodes only after they air on DC. Most of us agree that DC is the sole original network, despite the early release on D+
== "Audience Says"? ==
 
The main question: should the Infobox list the 9 that have officially released overall on Disney+, or only the 4 that have broadcast on Disney Channel??? Thanks, [[User:TheDoctorWho|<span style="color:#0000ff;">'''The'''</span><span style="color:#0000ff">'''Doctor'''</span><span style="color:#0000ff;">'''Who'''</span>]] [[User talk:TheDoctorWho|(talk)]] 18:07, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
[[MOS:TVAUDIENCE]] says "Do not include user ratings submitted to websites such as the Internet Movie Database, Metacritic, or Rotten Tomatoes (including its "Audience Says" feature), as they are vulnerable to vote stacking and demographic skew." [[MOS:FILMAUDIENCE]] says approximately the same. I didn't actually find anything called "Audience Says" on Rotten Tomatoes. Is that referring to what Rotten Tomatoes now calls its "Popcornmeter", or is that referring to something else, such as individual comments submitted by members of the public? —⁠ ⁠[[User:BarrelProof|BarrelProof]] ([[User talk:BarrelProof|talk]]) 20:16, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
 
:The episode count is based on episodes being released anywhere, not just the original network. The idea is that episodes being produced does not guarantee them being released, so we wait until an episode is released before increasing the count in the infobox. All of the episodes that have been released on Disney+ are confirmed, available, and should be counted in the infobox. - [[User:Adamstom.97|adamstom97]] ([[User talk:Adamstom.97|talk]]) 18:14, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
:[https://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/article/weve-updated-our-score-boxes/ Here]: {{tq|"Audience Says" is a short blurb that summarizes what fans think of a movie, drawing on common points made in user reviews written for the title}} [[User:Gonnym|Gonnym]] ([[User talk:Gonnym|talk]]) 20:20, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
:Agreed with adamstom97 as those nine episodes are already available and can be watch on Disney+ via subscription, so it should be 9 not 4 in the infobox. [[User:Windborne Rider|<b style="color:#008080; text-shadow:0.1em 0.2em 0.1em #FFF8E7">𝙹𝚒𝚢𝚊𝚗 忌炎</b>]] [[User talk:Windborne Rider|<b style="color:#008080; text-shadow:0.1em 0.2em 0.1em #FFF8E7"><small>(𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔)</small></b>]] 19:04, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
::OK, but are they still using that feature? That links to a blog entry from more than 3 years ago, and I don't see such blurbs for the well-known movies I checked on the site. Is it acceptable to use averaged audience scores such as the Rotten Tomatoes "Popcornmeter" or the Metacritic "User Score"? —⁠ ⁠[[User:BarrelProof|BarrelProof]] ([[User talk:BarrelProof|talk]]) 20:31, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
:The point is they have been released and available to the public. Doesn't matter how. They should be counted. [[User:Geraldo Perez|Geraldo Perez]] ([[User talk:Geraldo Perez|talk]]) 19:19, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
:Copying my comment from your talk page. Generally, I don't like to include the user-generated scores from anywhere - IMDB, Metacritic, RottenTomatoes in part because they are largely fed by either fans or haters of shows and are easily manipulated. If the only source for a user generated rating is IMDB/Metacritic/RT, I would 100% leave it out. If a secondary sources calls out the score and highlights something unusual about it, that's worth a second glance to see if it should be included with the full context - show XYZ was review-bombed and the user rating on DEF went from 9.5 to 2.3 in a month. That's notable and worth mentioning. '''[[User talk:Ravensfire|<span style="color: darkred;">Ravensfire</span>]]''' ([[User talk:Ravensfire|talk]]) 20:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
::I thinkstill say go by when it airs on Disney havingChannel thisas discussionit is goodthe justonly toprimary getnetwork. someIf definitionnot, herea andnote useshould thatbe toincluded updateon the MOSinfobox next the episode count until all episodes have been aired on Disney Channel. '''— [[User talk:RavensfireYoungForever|<span style="color: darkred#E63E62;font-family:Georgia;">Ravensfire'''Young'''</span>]]<span style="color: #414A4C;font-family:Georgia;">''' (Forever'''</span>]][[User talk:Ravensfire YoungForever|<sup style="color: #2D68C4F">(talk)</sup>]]) 20 22:3707, 43 SeptemberNovember 2024 (UTC)
::I still fail to see the reason of only counting what's aired on the primary network. If the first 9 were released for free on YouTube before airing on DC, it's still undeniable that those episodes had released. There's also a precedence for this, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=High_School_Musical:_The_Musical:_The_Series&oldid=925368962 High School Music: The Musical: The Series listed one episode having aired on the Infobox as early as November 9], when Disney+, it's "only primary network", didn't even launch until November 12. [[User:TheDoctorWho|<span style="color:#0000ff;">'''The'''</span><span style="color:#0000ff">'''Doctor'''</span><span style="color:#0000ff;">'''Who'''</span>]] [[User talk:TheDoctorWho|(talk)]] 21:17, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:If the "Audience Says" aspect of RT has been retired, then I see no issues with removing that parenthetical. Really, I try to avoid the use of parentheticals in general. I'm assuming that was originally added to the guideline because there were issues with editors adding that specifically. [[User:Doniago|DonIago]] ([[User talk:Doniago|talk]]) 12:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
 
::It was presumably useful information at the time it was added. What would be useful now is to clarify whether the Rotten Tomatoes "Popcornmeter" and the Metacritic "User Score" are acceptable. I suggest they are not, and that the MOS should be clarified to say this. In fact I just discovered someone already added a mention of the Popcornmeter. I expanded it to also mention the Metacritic "User Score". —⁠ ⁠[[User:BarrelProof|BarrelProof]] ([[User talk:BarrelProof|talk]]) 14:59, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
:Agree that it should be only Disne Channel as it is the primary network it started on. This has been done with Raven's Home and a few other shows that were released on Disney Plus later. [[User:Magical Golden Whip|Magical Golden Whip]] ([[User talk:Magical Golden Whip|talk]]) 20:44, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
I appreciate that you are refreshing the documentation and adding clarification[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Film&diff=prev&oldid=1244184295] that you feel is necessary but it seems redundant to me. I would suggest instead (or in addition) to point up to the higher level guidelines and principles of [[WP:UGC]] or [[WP:RS]] because audience scores are fundamentally unreliable and that is why they not allowed. -- [[Special:Contributions/109.79.167.27|109.79.167.27]] ([[User talk:109.79.167.27|talk]]) 21:14, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
 
== Plot summaries for multi-part episodes/multi-episode serials ==
 
The plot section states that "Episode articles should have a prose plot summary of no more than 400 words," a standard also mentioned on [[WP:PLOTSUM]]. This handles standalone episodes fine enough -- however, it runs into problems when we account for articles that cover multi-episode stories. For instance, the first 26 seasons of ''[[Doctor Who]]'' consist of stories that typically span four to six episodes, with a couple more extreme cases encompassing [[The War Games|ten]] and [[The Daleks' Master Plan|twelve]]. Similarly, ''[[Avatar: The Last Airbender]]'' has several multi-part episodes across its three seasons, such as the two-episode "[[The Secret of the Fire Nation]]" and the four-part "[[Sozin's Comet]]".
 
In cases like these, my approach up to this point was to consider each article's contents one "episode" despite being produced and aired as multiple interconnected ones; this resulted in a lot of trimming in order to fit the plots within 400 words, sometimes throwing out plot-relevant details that connect these episodes to other installments or elaborate upon things like character motives and backstories. However, another user sent me a message arguing that these articles would probably benefit from a higher word limit due to how the stories in question were put together and how this reflects on the plots. Given this, would it be a good idea to expand the word limit for articles on multi-story episodes (within reason of course -- I'm not suggesting that we need five thousand words to concisely summarize "The Daleks' Master Plan")? [[User:Game4brains|Game4brains]] ([[User talk:Game4brains|talk]]) 07:43, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
 
:I think this may be best left to local consensus as it depends on the situation. If one article is about two episodes I don't think there is an issue with having two 400 word plot summaries in one article, but if it is more than that it makes sense to go with more of a high-level summary i.e. 500 words covering the plots of 10 or 12 episodes (I say 500 as that is the limit we have for a season-long summary so we shouldn't need to go above that for one story arc). - [[User:Adamstom.97|adamstom97]] ([[User talk:Adamstom.97|talk]]) 09:13, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Television"