Ad Orientem (talk | contribs) m Protected "Talk:List of The Loud House episodes": Persistent sock puppetry This is getting out of hand. ([Edit=Require autoconfirmed or confirmed access] (expires 14:41, 1 July 2017 (UTC))) |
|
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 14:41, 17 June 2017
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Template:WikiProject Nickelodeon
|
Format
Guys. I dont like the format of it. I want to get rid of those br thing to make it better. Crazybob2014 (talk) 00:28, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Format removal
Please stop removing formats like that, as you did to Article:List of The Loud House episodes. Carmen Melendez 22:54, 13 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carmen Melendez (talk • contribs)
Fake
Guys, please stop adding your fake episodes. However, fake airdates and episodes drive me crazy. So stop this instant. Singed: Carmen Melendez 21:13, 15 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carmen Melendez (talk • contribs)
Future episode sourcing
Per WP:V and WP:TVUP, all future episodes must have a reliable source accompanying them. Many IP editors and MapleTreeXZ have been adding unsourced episodes or episodes sourced to IMDb, which is not a reliable source. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:46, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
The Loudest Mission in episode 39
Please stop adding "The Loudest Mission". It really annoys me. Carmen Melendez 21:15, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Pulp Friction does not come before Pets Peeved
You guys are always wrong in this wiki. It's Pets Peeved then Pulp Friction. Carmen Melendez 21:15, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Episodes need to be listed in order of air dates
Episodes in episode tables need to be listed in the order that the episodes were aired (i.e. in order of air date). This is standard WP:TV practice. In the case of this article, the production codes are even included, so there is absolutely no reason not to list episodes in the order that they were aired.
As of right now, at least one season 1 episode, and numerous season 2 episodes are listed out of airing order. That needs to change. I am posting this message to the Talk page as a courtesy – but I, or somebody else, is very likely to reorder the episodes in airing order which is the correct WP:TV practice, in the very near future... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:34, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
- I concur with the above. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:42, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
- I agree as well. If episodes are in the wrong order, you need to cite a reliable source that says it is, not just expect everyone to believe you because you are omnipotent and awesome. Katniss May the odds be ever in your favor ♥ 00:46, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
But wikipedia is meant to be dumb. Well, at least a little bit dumb. NickelodeonFan46 01:33, 15 June 2017 (UTC)(Striking comment of editor indefinitely blocked for IP socking, etc. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:13, 16 June 2017 (UTC) )
- I agree as well. If episodes are in the wrong order, you need to cite a reliable source that says it is, not just expect everyone to believe you because you are omnipotent and awesome. Katniss May the odds be ever in your favor ♥ 00:46, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
I agree, of course, that they should be in airing order. I haven't looked much into it but Futon and Screener should help us with that. nyuszika7h (talk) 09:58, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
Director, writer, storyboard columns
Per IJBall's message above as well as the discussion on his talk page, I've done a major clean-up here, most notably to order things by air date. It was such a mess, however, that rather than trying to dig through everything and attempt to fix things that way, I re-created everything from scratch in a sandbox page and then copied and pasted everything once I was done. I also cleaned up some other things as well made some additional beneficial changes:
- The Pilot and Shorts sections were removed due to being completely unsourced.
- A bunch of trivial notes were removed.
- Pretty much all of the episode summaries were copyright violations and were therefore removed.
- Columns for "directed by," "written by," and "storyboard by" were removed. They are not absolutely necessary and by removing them the episode tables are much more neat and compact for this article about an animated television series. Animated television series articles are a bit more complicated in terms of organizing content than live-action series articles, such as Andi Mack. A good example of animated television series articles being more complicated is this article before being cleaned up.
- Fixed a plethora of rounding errors with the ratings. It's not a difficult concept to understand that when the number you're removing due to rounding is 5–9, you round up—for example, 1.545 would round to 1.55—and that when the number you're removing due to rounding is 1–4, you don't do anything—for example, 1.283 would round to 1.28. However, like I said, I found a plethora of rounding errors. For example, a 1.918 rating for total viewers was incorrectly rounded to 1.91 instead of 1.92. Amaury (talk | contribs) 05:20, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- Please reinsert absolutely "directed by"/"written by"/"storyboarded by", becuase a Wikipedia's episode table without those columns doesn't make any sense and you also lose that sense of curiosity and knowledge, about the work done by people in that series Luigi1090 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:04, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- First comment: Amaury's point was that, in addition to all the other problems with it (e.g. being unsourced, and downright in accurate), the original table was "too busy" with too many columns "sequeezing" the available information, and I fully agree with that assessment – in this case, "less is more": i.e. fewer columns is better.
Second comment: the 'Directed by' column absolutely does not need to be added back to the table: every episode of this series was directed by either Chris Savino (mostly), Kyle Marshall, or Chris Savino and Kyle Marshall together – that information can easily be reported in prose form at the article, so we don't need a 'Directed By' column at all.
Third comment: I don't see any point or necessity in including the "Storyboarded by" in the table. This seems to be some sort of "sacred cow" at some of the "animated series" articles, but it strikes me as effectively "trivia". It doesn't merit inclusion IMO.
Final comment: That leaves the "Written By" column – I can see some justification for adding that column back to the table, provided there is consensus for it. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:33, 16 June 2017 (UTC)- Restoring the "written by" column sounds reasonable as long as it's done properly, as in listing the writing credits exactly as they are listed on-screen, names and everything. And if someone in our group wants to go through and confirm the credits when they have the time, that would be a huge help. I've already set a series recording for the series, but it'll take a while, and because we're with Charter, I can't log in to watch stuff on the Nickelodeon site because Nickelodeon is a Viacom network, and I guess they don't currently have any agreements or whatever with Charter. Amaury (talk | contribs) 06:31, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- First comment: Amaury's point was that, in addition to all the other problems with it (e.g. being unsourced, and downright in accurate), the original table was "too busy" with too many columns "sequeezing" the available information, and I fully agree with that assessment – in this case, "less is more": i.e. fewer columns is better.
Keep the columns "directed by"/"written by"/"storyboarded by", becuase a Wikipedia's episode table about the animated series without them doesn't make any sense. Luigi1090 (talk) 06:19, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- As per the intro of MOS:TABLE:
"...sometimes the information in a table may be better presented as prose paragraphs or as an embedded list."
There is absolutely no advantage to presenting the "Directed by" column in the case of this series – one guy directed most of the episodes, and two guys directed them all between the two of them. Again, the information on the directors is tailor-made for a couple of sentences at the start of each season section, above the table. So oppose a "Directed by" column in this case as unnecessary and a waste of table space – that info is better handled by prose. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 06:33, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
I agree with the ordering by episode airdates, but that's as far as I go. We should most definitely keep the columns, but merge the Writer and Storyboard columns into one. A clear of example of this is when I cleared this terrible version of Dawn of the Croods into this less terrible version, as {{StoryTeleplay}} allows for custom lines within the template; see the documentation for more. Constantly quoting WP:OSE as "you can't use the argument that other stuff exists" is especially invalid when other examples within the WikiProject Television also use the same format without issue; for example, the List of Vikings episodes article lists Michael Hirst as the same writer for every episode over four seasons. There has been no issue with that. If there have been variations of who directed the episodes, per the above post by IJBall, then it should most definitely be included, even if it was only one variation. Other examples of one directing helming most of the series can be seen at List of The Big Bang Theory episodes or List of How I Met Your Mother episodes. -- AlexTW 06:47, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- I have requested opinions at both Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television and Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television; therefore, not just the ones that have been personally requested. -- AlexTW 06:52, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- You guys quote guidelines—and like they're policies, for that matter, when they're not—all the time, yet we can't? Funny. The WP:OSE statement is not irrelevant. Template:Episode table has the status for essentially all parameters as optional, including the aforementioned ones. They are not required to be used. Amaury (talk | contribs) 06:57, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- They're guidelines, yes, and they do exist for a reason. We don't just throw them out of the window after they've been created simply because we may disagree with them. You mistake what "optional" means in the {{Episode table}} documentation; "optional" means that they are not determinantal to the functioning of the template. For example, where {{Aired episodes}} states that the parameters at "Required", it means that
|num=
and|title=
are required for the template to actually work. The more philosophical definition of "optional" for particular series does not belongs in the documentation. -- AlexTW 07:02, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- They're guidelines, yes, and they do exist for a reason. We don't just throw them out of the window after they've been created simply because we may disagree with them. You mistake what "optional" means in the {{Episode table}} documentation; "optional" means that they are not determinantal to the functioning of the template. For example, where {{Aired episodes}} states that the parameters at "Required", it means that
- Cool, so they ignore MOS:TABLE at List of Vikings episodes... Who cares?! You are supposed to present information in tabular form when there is a clear advantage in doing so. There is no advantage to doing so when every cell, or nearly every cell, in a column is going to present exactly the same information. That's when you're supposed to use a sentence of prose (or two) to present the same information in a better form. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 07:06, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- The more specific guidelines and consensus' of WP:TV and MOS:TV come into effect over that of a general guideline. It also says "
sometimes the information in a table may be better presented as prose paragraphs
" (emphasis mine). Sometimes. And you yourself clearly statedone guy directed most of the episodes, and two guys directed them all between the two of them
. If every single episode were the same, your arguments may have some validity; however, there is clearly variation for a number of the episodes, meaning that specific details need to be included for each and every episode. Even if only one episode was different from the rest, it would still be required. This is a nice discussion, by the way. It's what should have happened either before the editors, or after they were initially reverted per WP:BRD. Not an ensuing edit war. -- AlexTW 07:11, 17 June 2017 (UTC)- You can still cover that in prose form, Alex: "Chris Savino directed all the episodes of season 1, except for the episode "One Flu Over the Loud House" which was directed by Kyle Marshall." Boom. Done. You've presented all of the information that's needed, without needlessly including a table column that would have contained almost entirely redundant information. Just because other LoE articles have been ignoring this doesn't mean that those other LoE have been doing it "correctly", or have been following "best practices". --IJBall (contribs • talk) 07:18, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- Incorrect. We do seem to disagree. It is specific to an episode, and therefore, you include it in the row for that episode. Therefore, you need to include the details for all episodes. See the examples that I provided. However, this seems to merely be a discussion on the director columns, where the writer and storyboard columns are still required, even after I posted a suggestion and yet another correlating example for their inclusion. They may not have been following "best practices", as you put it, but nor have there been any editors who have had an issue with it and mass-deleted the content as a result. -- AlexTW 07:22, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
"Therefore, you need to include the details for all episodes."
Um, no – there is nothing anywhere that says what you are claiming. There is nothing that say this must be put "in table form". And the information isn't "mass deleted" – that's nonsense. What the discussion is about now is how to best present the information in question. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 08:09, 17 June 2017 (UTC)- Mind if I ask why you're replying in the middle of a conversation, not the end of it? You're been here for long enough, you should know better. {{Episode list}} exists to list the specific credits of an episode. That's supportive enough. Else, why not list every credit in prose? ANd it certainly was mass-deleted; view the two versions before and after the edit, and a great deal of information disappears. Especially the writer/storyboard information, which was deleted without reason or replacement. -- AlexTW 08:18, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- I have no idea what your first point is. Second, you seem to be going off the idea that because parameters in a template exist that they have to be used – they don't (that was basically Amaury's point). Third, on the "storyboarder", I have yet to see anyone explain why this information is important enough that it "has" to be included: we don't include this for live-action series – why is it so important that it needs to be included for animated series? (And, no – "It's always been included in animated TV series LoE articles" isn't an acceptable answer here...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 08:23, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- They don't have to be used, no. However, when there is any variation at all, including a singular episode, then they should. I would recommend that you do your own research on why storyboard information is more relevant to animated series than it is to live-action series; there's plenty available. Though, your constant use of WP:OSE would suggest that you have nothing else to really contribute to that, other than the fact that you don't like it. Nighty night. -- AlexTW 08:26, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- I have no idea what your first point is. Second, you seem to be going off the idea that because parameters in a template exist that they have to be used – they don't (that was basically Amaury's point). Third, on the "storyboarder", I have yet to see anyone explain why this information is important enough that it "has" to be included: we don't include this for live-action series – why is it so important that it needs to be included for animated series? (And, no – "It's always been included in animated TV series LoE articles" isn't an acceptable answer here...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 08:23, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- Mind if I ask why you're replying in the middle of a conversation, not the end of it? You're been here for long enough, you should know better. {{Episode list}} exists to list the specific credits of an episode. That's supportive enough. Else, why not list every credit in prose? ANd it certainly was mass-deleted; view the two versions before and after the edit, and a great deal of information disappears. Especially the writer/storyboard information, which was deleted without reason or replacement. -- AlexTW 08:18, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- Incorrect. We do seem to disagree. It is specific to an episode, and therefore, you include it in the row for that episode. Therefore, you need to include the details for all episodes. See the examples that I provided. However, this seems to merely be a discussion on the director columns, where the writer and storyboard columns are still required, even after I posted a suggestion and yet another correlating example for their inclusion. They may not have been following "best practices", as you put it, but nor have there been any editors who have had an issue with it and mass-deleted the content as a result. -- AlexTW 07:22, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- You can still cover that in prose form, Alex: "Chris Savino directed all the episodes of season 1, except for the episode "One Flu Over the Loud House" which was directed by Kyle Marshall." Boom. Done. You've presented all of the information that's needed, without needlessly including a table column that would have contained almost entirely redundant information. Just because other LoE articles have been ignoring this doesn't mean that those other LoE have been doing it "correctly", or have been following "best practices". --IJBall (contribs • talk) 07:18, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- The more specific guidelines and consensus' of WP:TV and MOS:TV come into effect over that of a general guideline. It also says "
- (edit conflict) If they were just re-inserting those columns, that would have been one thing, but they were all-out reverting everything, including the listing of all episodes by air date that was done among some other corrections and even re-introducing removed copyrighted content which is a big no-no. The two editors who reverted are additionally suspected of being sockpuppets—and an SPI has been filed. If the results come back as confirmed, then that even more invalidates their edits. Amaury (talk | contribs) 07:26, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- That does not validate the edit-war that became from your edits; was the SPI filed before or after your mass edit? Once you were reverted even the first time, you should have let the status quo remain and started the discussion then. But talking of the past won't fix anything. If the columns are reinstated, for which I still suggest merging the two writer-related columns, how else do you plan to do so unless you go back to the original version? I mean, you're more than welcome to copy-paste the content from an old revision, but it'd be easier to restore it and then make the agreed-upon edits, such as the ordering and copyvios. -- AlexTW 07:31, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- It is standard WP:TV practice to list things by air date. There was no edit war on our parts. The article was such a mess before when editing that it'd be easier to look at an old revision and copy and paste. But I'm not going to respond any further here if you're going to keep making allegations like that. Amaury (talk | contribs) 07:35, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- I agree on the air date. It's why I separate this into a "Director, writer, storyboard columns" section, as there does not seem to be an issue with that. If you see the article history, you will note a great number of reverts. That is proof within itself. Up to you how you do it, but I guess it would be easier to wait for further opinions from any editors that have been brought to this discussion through the correct means. -- AlexTW 07:38, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- It is standard WP:TV practice to list things by air date. There was no edit war on our parts. The article was such a mess before when editing that it'd be easier to look at an old revision and copy and paste. But I'm not going to respond any further here if you're going to keep making allegations like that. Amaury (talk | contribs) 07:35, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- That does not validate the edit-war that became from your edits; was the SPI filed before or after your mass edit? Once you were reverted even the first time, you should have let the status quo remain and started the discussion then. But talking of the past won't fix anything. If the columns are reinstated, for which I still suggest merging the two writer-related columns, how else do you plan to do so unless you go back to the original version? I mean, you're more than welcome to copy-paste the content from an old revision, but it'd be easier to restore it and then make the agreed-upon edits, such as the ordering and copyvios. -- AlexTW 07:31, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) If they were just re-inserting those columns, that would have been one thing, but they were all-out reverting everything, including the listing of all episodes by air date that was done among some other corrections and even re-introducing removed copyrighted content which is a big no-no. The two editors who reverted are additionally suspected of being sockpuppets—and an SPI has been filed. If the results come back as confirmed, then that even more invalidates their edits. Amaury (talk | contribs) 07:26, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
First of all, there's no rush to add back the columns – it's better not to have any information at all than information that is likely to be wrong in many places. Directors and writers are pretty standard – if there are only a few directors, they can be mentioned in prose elsewhere, or perhaps in bullet points above the table or notes in episode summaries. I don't have a strong opinion on the inclusion of directors in the table. Regarding storyboarders, WP:TV consensus is not to include them, most recent discussion here. – nyuszika7h (talk) 09:58, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
A Message to Amaury
- Hello Amaury, I am a fan of The Loud House & I do not appreciate your changes to the list of episodes on Wikipedia. Sometimes less is not good & your edits are unbeneficial. Please restore everything the way it was before & leave it alone. Thank you. I am not JeremyCreek.172.248.41.151 (talk) 23:06, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- Please respond to the points made by both Amaury and myself in the topic above this one. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:08, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- Hello IJBall, I think you & Amaury need to respond to my requests, remove your edits to the episode list, & please don't make further edits in the future. Thank you.172.248.41.151 (talk) 23:12, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- Your request ignores the consensus up-page, as well as established WP:TV practice, that episodes need to be listed in airing order. It's incumbent upon you to show why episodes should not be listed in airing order. So far, you have failed to explain why this should be the case, beyond a vague "WP:ILIKEIT" argument, which is not policy- or guideline-based, nor is it supported by available sourcing. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:16, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- I feel like your edits take away all the details of the episodes & I feel upset. I like having more details on episodes of any TV show & I feel like your edits will be permanent. It doesn't matter if episodes of TV shows air out of production order. SpongeBob does this frequently, as well as The Fairly OddParents, & they are both Nickelodeon shows! It will be confusing for Wikipedia readers to know what the episodes are about.172.248.41.151 (talk) 23:25, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- Are your edits temporary?172.248.41.151 (talk) 01:10, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- I'm in a downward spiral, because of you and Amaury!172.248.41.151 (talk) 02:18, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- I strongly urge you to take Wikipedia:It's not the End of the World and Wikipedia:DGAF to heart – what we're doing here shouldn't be a primary focus of one's life. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:32, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- I'm in a downward spiral, because of you and Amaury!172.248.41.151 (talk) 02:18, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- Are your edits temporary?172.248.41.151 (talk) 01:10, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- I feel like your edits take away all the details of the episodes & I feel upset. I like having more details on episodes of any TV show & I feel like your edits will be permanent. It doesn't matter if episodes of TV shows air out of production order. SpongeBob does this frequently, as well as The Fairly OddParents, & they are both Nickelodeon shows! It will be confusing for Wikipedia readers to know what the episodes are about.172.248.41.151 (talk) 23:25, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- Your request ignores the consensus up-page, as well as established WP:TV practice, that episodes need to be listed in airing order. It's incumbent upon you to show why episodes should not be listed in airing order. So far, you have failed to explain why this should be the case, beyond a vague "WP:ILIKEIT" argument, which is not policy- or guideline-based, nor is it supported by available sourcing. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:16, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- Hello IJBall, I think you & Amaury need to respond to my requests, remove your edits to the episode list, & please don't make further edits in the future. Thank you.172.248.41.151 (talk) 23:12, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- Please respond to the points made by both Amaury and myself in the topic above this one. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:08, 16 June 2017 (UTC)