User talk:IJBall/Archive 25

Archive 20

←

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

→

Archive 30

Gungrave, etc.

Can you take care of Gungrave (anime)? The redirect Gungrave (TV series) leads to the article so I can't move it. --Gonnym (talk) 17:29, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:34, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Can you also take care of Noir (anime)? --Gonnym (talk) 15:08, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done, but it looks like you didn't need me to do it as the redirect at Noir (TV series) only had a single edit and could have been overwritten by anybody... Also, odd that there's been no other TV series with the title Noir – that surprises me... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:26, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

A few more: List of Ojamajo Doremi Na-i-sho episodes -> Ojamajo Doremi Na-i-sho; List of Ojamajo Doremi Sharp episodes -> Ojamajo Doremi Sharp; List of Ojamajo Doremi Dokkaan! episodes -> Ojamajo Doremi Dokkaan!. --Gonnym (talk) 08:57, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done,  Done, and  Done. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:17, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Now that one Trailblazer is gone, this can now be moved -> Trailblazers (XLEAGUE.TV series) to Trailblazers (TV series). --Gonnym (talk) 07:51, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:41, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Treasure (animated TV series)

I can't find information about Treasure (animated TV series) other than the press release on the article. No other information online, no IMDB listing. The press release says its going to be shown in Canada and not Australia (as mentioned in the article). Have any ideas about this? --Gonnym (talk) 17:21, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

@Gonnym: Nope. And if there's no evidence that it ever aired (and, if it had, there'd likely be evidence), then the article should be WP:AfD'ed for failing WP:TVSHOW. It is not unheard of for especially animated TV shows to get announced, and then never actually go into production... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:23, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Ok, the EL has an interview with the author of the book and it says that "You can catch Treasure every Saturday on BBC2." - so it did air, but why can't I find any mention of it elsewhere? --Gonnym (talk) 17:26, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

@Gonnym: Because not all "children's programming" is actually notable. That's where WP:TVSHOW is wrong – esp. lately, just because a TV show has aired somewhere, does not mean that it has garnered enough coverage to be "notable". That's especially true of children's television programming and cable TV "lifestyle" shows. So, I'd still be tempted to WP:AfD it, but it's a risk as there might be people who will say "two sources" = "notable", even though one of them is a press release (so WP:PRIMARY, and not contributing to notability), and the second "source" is actually an EL. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:30, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Deadly Class (TV series)

Hi, I have a quick question since you seem significantly more knowledgeable about TV policy than me. Original air date on Episodes tables is for the first instance of when an episode has aired right? I'm asking because I'm having a few issues with an editor that keeps placing the timeslot premiere onto the episodes table. To clarify the series pilot had a special release online on Dec 20, it then aired on Syfy on Dec 30, and then had a timeslot premiere on Jan 16. So the correct date would be December 30 right? Thanks. Esuka (talk) 21:53, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

@Esuka: Either Dec. 20 or Dec. 30 could be used, but this all should definitely be handled/explained "in a note" IMO – e.g. see Falling Water (TV series)#ep1, Van Helsing (TV series)#ep1, List of Wynonna Earp episodes#ep26 (where this issue isn't handled as well, IMHO...) – and there are others which I am forgetting right now. Incidentally, I think Cousins for Life should probably do something similar to this for its "special preview", so pinging Amaury... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:26, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Thankyou, I had originally used the note "The timeslot premiere was on January 16, 2019, which received 598k viewers and a 0.2 18–49 rating" when the editor attempted to place the Jan 16 date onto the table. Because it was mentioned in the lede that it had a special preview on the dates listed and I felt I would be duplicating things by including on the table too. Esuka (talk) 22:38, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

I think you'd want to mention the Dec. 20 release online in the note as well – optimally, in this case, all three dates should be mentioned in the 'note'. A separate 'note' can be added to the 'Viewers' column to handle the ratings info for the premiere(s)... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:02, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

I can take care of it, a la Knight Squad, but I'm still of the mind that how a network promotes something is generally irrelevant and should be ignored, especially considering that things that are promoted as sneak peeks or previews are done so generally solely for ratings purposes. See, for example, Austin & Ally, which premiered as a preview on December 2, 2011, following the Good Luck Charlie Christmas film. "Movin' In" is still the first episode of Cousins for Life, regardless of promotion. Same with Knight Squad's "Opening Knight." Add: In all of these cases, it was a full episode that aired. An example of a rare exception where it is fine to mention both dates in the lead would be I Am Frankie's series premiere. Only half of the first episode—"I Am... in Danger"—was shown for the sneak peek, not the full episode, with that first half known as "I Am... a Gaines." In that case, that was truly a sneak peek or preview. However, in all the other cases mentioned above, they weren't truly sneak peeks or previews as they were full episodes and were just labeled as such for ratings purposes, as mentioned, and because they were airing outside of their regular slots. Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:13, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

I think this is always worth noting – to have a TV show air a "special" episode 2–3 months (in the most extreme examples) before it starts airing "consecutive" episodes in its regular timeslot is unusual, esp. before the past decade. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:18, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Disney Channel

For Nickelodeon, this is common, but scheduling changes rarely happen with Disney Channel since they don't have traditional ads and therefore don't really care about ratings. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:59, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Damn – I use reruns of Bunk'd and Stuck in the Middle for "background noise" sometimes, so I'll miss those two. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:34, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Thought you might like this and this. Amaury (talk | contribs) 20:19, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

https://twitter.com/nickandmore/status/1101238517332668416 Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:13, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Program or show?

For those that aren't series (continuing story elements), such as Paradise Run, we should use either "program," as you did at Paradise Run, or "show." However, is there a difference between "program" and "show" or can those be used interchangeably? Additionally, for those that are programs or shows, should the sections like "series overview" still be called that or should they be "program overview" or "show overview"? Category names, though, there's not much we can do about, such as [year] television series debuts. Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:32, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

"Program" vs. "series" is currently a controversial question – some of us think TV "series" is about "continuing story elements" from one episode to the next, with TV shows with individual "standalone" episodes qualifying instead as TV "programs"; others think anything with a "season" is a "series", and anything that airs "continuously, year-round" is "program". (Personally, I don't understand the argument for the latter distinction at all...) A third option is to call anything with multiple episodes a "series", and reserve "TV program" for singly-aired, "one-off" TV shows (e.g. like the Nickelodeon Halloween and Christmas specials)... Bottom line, right now there's no agreed upon definition, so you can probably just go with the word that makes the most sense... In terms of TV "show", I think a lot of us feel that word is "vernacular" that should be avoided in favor of "series" or "program". --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:28, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

On the other question, for those cases where we go with program, should everything be changed accordingly outside of just the lead, etc.? So should "Series overview" be changed to "Program overview" or should that just stay as is? Amaury (talk | contribs) 04:53, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Hard to say – honestly, it's likely not worth the trouble to change it. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:08, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

The Bachelor Australia

Do you know if the name of the show is The Bachelor (Australian TV series) or The Bachelor Australia? The article title does not match usage in the article. --Gonnym (talk) 14:20, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Yikes... When in doubt, you always want to get a look at the show's title card for "official" show titles. However, it looks like secondary sources do (sometimes?) refer to it as "The Bachelor Australia", so this could get messy... After a quick look around, it does not look to me like the show's title card says "The Bachelor Australia", but Alucard 16 seems to be better at actually digging those up... But I'd go with whatever the title card says. (My strong guess is that it's just The Bachelor...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:24, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

@Gonnym: Australia is a bit weird when it comes to naming shows like this. If I remember there was a similar issue with Big Brother (Australian TV series) where it was previously named Big Brother Australia. This issue for both Big Brother and The Bachelor stems from the production teams using both names. In both cases the opening titles omit the country from the name but the full name with the country is used when disambiguation is needed like with social media.

From the episodes I was able to watch from the fifth and sixth seasons on air the name is The Bachelor while the name The Bachelor Australia is used when disambiguation is needed like for the social media accounts and clips from the global YouTube channel about the show [1]. This old production page from Shine Australia (which produced seasons 1 - 3) uses both names for example. For both The Bachelor (Australian TV series) and The Bachelorette (Australian TV series) the lead just needs to be re-written to something like "The Bachelor (also known as The Bachelor Australia) is an Australian reality television adaptation of the U.S. series of the same name." The secondary name can also be placed in the infobox via the |show_name_2=.

The article Bachelor in Paradise Australia should be moved to Bachelor in Paradise (Australian TV series) to be consistent with the first two articles. The case is the same the primary name is Bachelor in Paradise with the secondary name Bachelor in Paradise Australia being used by the production company when disambiguation is required. Hope this clears up the naming confusion. Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} 16:05, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done Fixed issues with lead, infobox and Bachelor in Paradise. Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} 16:19, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

List of Henry Danger characters

I don't have time right now, but this should be reviewed. A couple things that stand out:

1. Jack Griffo and Kira Kosarin were "also starring"—in other words, main cast, but only for that single episode—and don't belong there.
2. Names should be as per WP:COMMONNAME. Shawn, not Shawn Corbit.

Amaury (talk | contribs) 22:08, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

A lot of that is debatable, and can probably be removed. I would not include The Thundermans in their own sections – they can certainly be mentioned elsewhere, though, with links to List of The Thundermans characters included. But a lot of the other stuff is questionable or trivial or obvious, and probably isn't necessary. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:19, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done See here. Feel free to review and do anything further you think I may have missed or not done. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:39, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Double Dare (Nickelodeon game show)#Requested move 5 March 2019

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Double Dare (Nickelodeon game show)#Requested move 5 March 2019. I got around to this myself, but I'm holding off on actually voting since I'm not too sure if I'm right, but they're probably more correct than the current locations. I'll wait and see what you say and then support that. @Geraldo Perez and MPFitz1968: You're also invited. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:41, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

FTR, I waiting to see whatever comment Gonnym has before !voting in this one... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:51, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Double Dare (Nickelodeon game show)#Propose separate list of episodes page or season pages

There's been enough consensus to carry this out for a long time—67% agree with an LOE, while only 33% disagree with it—I had just forgotten about it. The question is, how do we go about it? Do we just go the normal route of List of Double Dare episodes, or something else? Additionally, how do we handle it on the main article? Should we remove all information about the revival on the main page and replace it with the main template? That would point to the 2018 episode list, where all that information would be presented. This is a fairly different case than splitting, say, Henry Danger. Also, it sounds like you think we should revisit the issue of splitting the 2018 version into its own article entirely, which would make this moot? Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:34, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

I honestly don't have a strong feeling or idea on this. I'd post a followup to the talk page, and see if others have any thoughts. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:15, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Descendants 3

There is an editor, Deor-9345 (8), who has now twice added a premiere date for the movie of May 16, 2019, without citing where they found this out. I have warned them about it after their second edit to the article, but this article will need watching. Pinging Amaury and Geraldo Perez about this as well. MPFitz1968 (talk) 21:10, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: That is clearly intentional date vandalism. Teasers on Disney Channel are clearly saying summer 2019. Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:13, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

This seems very suspicious. There's an Admin named Deor, so this editor's name is very suspicious. Add in the possible (probable?) data vandalism, and it doesn't look good... If they keep it up, I'd definitely report it. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:17, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

cleanup of article

hello, i was just looking through disney channel uk articles, and noticed that List of programmes broadcast by Disney Channel (UK and Ireland) is seemingly very outdated, considering many of the series are now over/no longer sydicated. i was wondering if you’d be able to help out with a cleanup of that article, as i’m unsure what goes where?

thanks! – Joesimnett (talk) 23:15, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

@Joesimnett: Honestly, articles like this are kind of controversial. Firstly, they are usually undersourced. Second, there's debate about whether they should even include "former" programming... In general, I think the rough consensus is these articles should just list that programming (current, upcoming, and former) which was produced specifically for the TV channel/network in question, and should not include "rerun" programming or TV shows that originated from other countries or networks. So that means that, at this article, the entire 'Programming from other networks' section should just be cut. Then you'd have to go through the 'Former programming' section, and figure which of those listed actually originated on Disney Channel (UK and Ireland), and which did not (and therefore should be cut)...

Honestly, that's a pretty big job, and I have other fish to fry right now, so I don't think I'm going to be able to help you out on this... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:22, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

it’s ok! i knew it was a big job and i really just wanted to offload it to someone lol. i’ll spend some time updating it, and hopefully making it more cohesive. – Joesimnett (talk) 23:38, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

List of The Good Doctor episodes

IJBall,

Isn't this way too early to be split into a List of The Good Doctor episodes? Season 2 is about to end. — YoungForever^(talk) 22:30, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

@YoungForever: It depends who you ask. I'm in the camp that thinks there should be about 50 episodes in an episode table before splitting off the LoE article (primarily due to WP:SIZESPLIT). The Good Doctor is currently at 36 episodes, so is short of that... OTOH, the show has been renewed for a third season, so will surely get to at least 50 episodes by next year. So whether you split off the LoE now vs. next year is probably just a matter of semantics. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:33, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) (talk page watcher) @YoungForever: My opinion is that once there is season two information, a split can be done. Despite "updates" being made to that guideline, it is still a guideline. However, I don't involve myself in articles like this (which is why I have my own sandbox versions for most of the broadcast series, to avoid stubborn people). For this article in particular, I'd say a split would be okay once there is known season three information—at least one episode. Amaury (talk | contribs) 22:34, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

@Amaury: Season 3 is definitely happening since it was just renewed last month. I don't think there is any information on season 3 as production and filming haven't started yet. — YoungForever^(talk) 22:43, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

@YoungForever: That's what I was getting at. We already know the series has been renewed for a third season, but as the second season has just ended will be ending come Monday and the third season likely won't premiere until late September, since broadcast networks do proper seasons, we likely won't have any airing information for the third season until sometime in August. Amaury (talk | contribs) 22:47, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

The editor that split the page provided no attribution for the split either, which is a huge mistake. They also have rendered the ratings tables on the main article useless as they have removed the primary sourcing for the final ratings during the split. The graph on the list of episodes page is also not sourced and can be removed and replaced with the ratings tables if someone feels like doing that. Esuka (talk) 23:03, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Now, what Esuka is referring to is a separate issue – in general, we revert WP:SPLITs that don't properly follow WP:CWW. On that basis, I'd be tempted to revert the split, and then to start a proper WP:SPLIT discussion at Talk:The Good Doctor (TV series)... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:08, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Another editor reverted the split already. — YoungForever^(talk) 01:31, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Another project

I've got another project for you, if you're interested/bored, when you have the time. Going through here and standardizing episode tables for series with two or more seasons. On a side note, can limited series, like Fast Layne, still be renewed? I imagine limited generally doesn't mean one season only, it can also just mean short seasons, shorter than even a typical 13-episode season (before potential back-orders). Amaury (talk | contribs) 04:32, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17

Hello IJBall,

News

• The WMF has announced that Google Translate is now available for translating articles through the content translation tool. This may result in an increase in machine translated articles in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to use the {{rough translation}} tag and gently remind (or inform) editors that translations from other language Wikipedia pages still require attribution per WP:TFOLWP.

Discussions of interest

• Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
• {{db-blankdraft}} was merged into G13 (Discussion)
• A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
• There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.

Reminders

• NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.

NPP Tools Report

• Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
• copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
• The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Legacies

Figured I owed it to you. Now the sandbox is much more useful. I'll leave confirming absences for the last two episodes for you, of course. I just did it to get credits added. Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:03, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

FWIW, I moved this to the talk page, but if you still want it there, that's of course fine, too. Amaury (talk | contribs) 20:42, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

OK. But, yeah – I generally don't think to check the Talk page, so as comment code should be fine... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:45, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Lucky

This Archived 2019-03-13 at the Wayback Machine can also probably be used. See #17. Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:21, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

I don't like using ratings for these kinds of purposes – I consider them to be WP:PRIMARY, but not even as good as a press release from someone like Nickelodeon. And to show real notability you really need a secondary source anyway... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:25, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Basketballplayersplay

This user has been nothing but problematic. I'm calling either WP:NOTHERE or WP:CIR. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:16, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Could be WP:CIR, though it's not a slam-dunk, and not disruptive enough to get sanctioned. In general, I do have concerns with editors whose primary concern seem to be to "adjust the spacing" in infobox coding – you see that a lot from IP editors, and it's usually indicative of low-quality editing... Anyway, in the case, I would advise continuing to keep an eye on it, and if there are specific concerns about their editing, I would start with personalized messages to their Talk page. And then see how things develop. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:22, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Just double-checking

This is fine in prose, correct? Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:20, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

I definitely think so, yeah, provided it's not a "one-off" mention – IOW, if a surname is mentioned just once over the course of a TV series, it's not notable/trivial info. But if a surname is mentioned multiple times, then it's no longer "trivial", even if the credited/common name is just the first name of the character. P.S. I will be taking both Syndey to the Max and Cousins for Life off my watchlist – I'm not watching either... As for Fast Layne, I'm hoping Disney will "marathon" it (hopefully multiple times) after all 8 episodes air, so I can catch it all at once. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:29, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

What, you don't like them? :( Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:26, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Basically, no – I actually dislike Cousins; Sydney I just find "meh" (similar to how I never got in to NRD&D). But I do like Coop & Cami, so the new shows haven't been a total "bust"... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:29, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Is there a problem with Cousins for Life? Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:34, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

I just don't like it – it skews too young, it's not funny, and it's often too "preachy", from what (little) I've seen... Frankly, the track record for Nick live-action shows that aren't from Schneider, or from Scott Fellows, has not been good IMO. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:37, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Kira Kosarin discography

hello, i’m aware Kira Kosarin isn’t notably a singer, but at what point do we add a discography for studio albums, singles, promo singles and music videos? it feels like notable information that might benefit the article, especially with her album next month. what are your thoughts? – DarkGlow (talk) 17:02, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

My opinion? (which I think is shared) – no 'Discography' section until someone is shown to have charted somewhere... IOW, any "celebrity" can release music, or even an album – but that's not a "notable" activity unless the music actually makes it onto a music chart somewhere. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:05, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

hello, another question about kira’s page. with her recently added infobox, i can’t help but see someone listed her facebook as a website. is facebook a website, or rather just her social media? – DarkGlow (talk) 19:44, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Per WP:ELMINOFFICIAL, you're allowed to list one "official" website for someone like this, and these days that's often either Twitter or Facebook. However, I feel that should be in the 'External links' section – a social media site like that shouldn't listed in the infobox: only a site like kirakosarin.com should be listed in the infobox, IMO. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:47, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

i completely agree! wanted to check with an experienced editor before i removed it :) –DarkGlow (talk) 19:50, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Not too happy

Same goes for my mother. FOX 11 on DirecTV has been out for about the last two weeks, which means that I've missed the last two weeks' worth of The Cool Kids—yesterday and February 22. I'm behind by three episodes, but I'll only be able to watch February 1's episode. The DVR is still recording that time, but as you can probably guess, it's nothing but the message that says the channel is down. It's something to do with negotiations, which is bullshit. They can't leave the channel up while negotiations take place? They did with Nickelodeon back when that big scare was going on between Viacom and Charter, in the short time we were with Charter before switching back to DirecTV. Thankfully, that's the only series I watch on FOX, but I'm not sure about my mother. ABC is also currently experiencing an outage, but I think it's just today as Thursday's A Million Little Things recorded just fine, so that is just a technical glitch. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:19, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

I lost Fox for a little over a week in January, due to the showdown between Spectrum cable and Tribune (a station group owner, which owns the Fox affiliate in my neck of the woods...) – I was forced to subscribe to Hulu for a month in order to pick up The Gifted, Lethal Weapon, Gotham and The Orville. I was not happy about this. These cable/satellite-broadcaster battles are becoming increasingly common... And tedious. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:26, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Last time I checked, Fox was still offline. And now this. Lovely. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:35, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Yep - Uverse people should probably expect to lose those channels for a while: plan for a week or more... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:38, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Thankfully, when this happened between Viacom and Spectrum back in 2017, during the short time we were with Spectrum from April until December of that year, none of Viacom's networks ended up going offline as they extended contracts while negotiations continued to take place. Hopefully that happens here with DirecTV, because hell if I'm going to miss Henry Danger and the KCAs this Saturday. Add: Contract agreements shouldn't be that difficult. And you know, back when this happened between Viacom and Spectrum, guess what? Viacom was blaming it on Spectrum for not accepting a "fair deal," while Spectrum was blaming it on Viacom for not accepting a "fail deal." But in the end, it seems to always be about the money. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:41, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

List of The Loud House episodes

@Geraldo Perez: I've requested protection, but I'm going to need more eyes here until it's applied. MPFitz1968 is already watching it and has also reverted. Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:02, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

List of voice actors

See here. Are you proud of me? (Feel free to copy-edit it a bit.) Similarly, I wonder if due to the complexity of Bunk'd with its third season—where three main cast members left and were replaced by three new main cast members—and upcoming fourth season—where three more main cast members leave and are replaced by three more new main cast members—we should just not list any cast in the lead at all and replace it with something else? Or rephrase it. Maybe ...on July 31, 2015. The series is a spinoff of Jessie. Amaury (talk | contribs) 05:19, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I approve of that... I think the way we handled Bunk'd is fair – it was originally a Jessie spinoff, so we mention the three cast members from that show (who were there for 3 of 4 seasons), and Lou is the only one there for the entire show's run, so we list Miranda May, but not any of the others. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 12:19, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

The only reason I did it for The Loud House is because of the multiple voice actors for Lincoln, but in general, I guess I just feel it's unfair to exclude some actors since they're still main cast, especially since WP:LEAD supports the inclusion of starring cast in the lead. Like with anything else, it's a guideline and common sense should be used, as if there's a series with 10+ main cast members, it would just be too much to have The series stars 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. And having The series stars 1, 3, 5, 7 makes it sound like only 1, 3, 5, and 7 are starring cast. So my thoughts are that we should either include all the main cast or none at all and in the case of the latter, replace "The series stars (or features the voice of)" with something else, along the lines of what I did for The Loud House. There you're not saying starring, just what it focuses on. So similarly for Bunk'd, I think we could rephrase the sentence so it doesn't contain "stars". Likewise for I Am Frankie, we could reword so it says something along the lines of "The series focuses on Frankie Gaines [other stuff here]" instead of "stars." Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:01, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

@Amaury: You can post to Talk:Bunk'd if you feel strongly about it, to try to get a new consensus, but outside of possibly changing the lede wording to something like, "The cast of the series includes Peyton List, Karan Brar, Skai Jackson, reprising their roles from Jessie, and Miranda May. I'm fine with the current lede for Bunk'd... Unrelatedly, there's something I've posted to Talk:List of Game Shakers episodes that I'd like you to mull over.. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:09, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Just for the record, I don't mind them being in the lead now, I just think it could be rephrased to avoid "stars" as I feel like that can confuse some people and make them think that 1, 3, 5, and 7 are the only main cast, when it's actually all 10 that are main cast. By changing "The series stars 1, 3, 5, and 7" to something like "The series focuses on 1, 3, 5, and 7," that makes it more clear that there are other main cast in the series, just that those are the primary focus of the series.

On another note, I finally got around to this, though I still don't think it's necessary personally, which I've already explained elsewhere, so I won't bore you with the details. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:24, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Game Shakers

As for Game Shakers, I saw it. I'm still thinking about it. We can invite Geraldo Perez and MPFitz1968 to that discussion as well. But real quick, Zap2it it still listing them under season 3, unlike iCarly. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:24, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes, they're still "season 3" episodes. But they're airing a full year later, and on a different network, so I think splitting into "Part 1" and "Part 2" makes a lot of sense in this case. Then I can add prose before the episode table explaining the broadcast details... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:24, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

We'll have to see what April's like, but "Snoop Therapy" is airing on Nickelodeon, per TFC. Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:37, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

OK, just saw it – the promo they run on TeenNick does say "...New episodes on Nick..." So it does seem like they are going to run the new set of episodes on Nick, not TeenNick. That probably makes the "Part 1"/"Part 2" division less necessary, though I still leaning in the direction of dividing the season that way anyway because of the long layoff between episodes... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:53, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Dora

Hi! You just reverted an admin's edit. A new update is the poster release, which clearly means that the official title has been announced. Thanks! M. Billoo 16:42, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

@M.Billoo2000: It doesn't matter. A WP:RM has been opened, and that should play out before the article is moved. There is WP:NOHURRY on this. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:44, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

OK. Special:Diff/888817428. M. Billoo 16:47, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Fast Layne

Need you to restore the recurring cast likely removed by accident in that last edit from Rtkat. I'm on my tablet right now and can't properly edit. You're free to fix my typos here. It's a pain to type. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:36, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

You mean Rtkat3's most recent edit?...  Done. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:48, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Sky Katz

Will need more eyes there. Someone tried to remove the redirect when nothing has changed. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:52, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

You'll never believe this...

Knight Squad is being promoted... regularly! There's a combined promo for the new episodes of Game Shakers, Cousins for Life, and... Knight Squad on March 30. The only time Knight Squad was "promoted" during January and February was with "coming up" during new Henry Danger and "coming up next" during new Cousins for Life, as I mentioned at User talk:IJBall/Archive 24#Knight Squad in January. I don't know if this could be taken as a good sign–not necessarily for another season, but perhaps at least another 10 episodes for season two for a regular-sized season–but it's a good thing either way. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:14, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Joefromrandb reported by User:Amaury (Result: ). Thank you. Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:59, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Custom templates

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.

---

I want to create custom versions the existing templates within my sandbox for templates such as Template:Infobox television to be used for my sandbox pages of series. For example, User:Amaury/sandbox/Alex, Inc.. Under "Release" in the infobox, I would want the first and last aired parameters to display as they do in the code, so we would see:

• First aired: March 28, 2018
• Last aired: May 16, 2018

And if a series is still running, then last aired will be left blank so only the first aired parameter displays. Looks like I would also need a couple of module pages as well; in this case, the first and third links shown on Template:Infobox television, so it should be doable. Amaury (talk | contribs) 20:52, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

I created a custom template a long time ago, after a template was deleted at TfD. What is it?... I can't even find it now!... Anyway, I think I ended up discovering that using templates not in template space was such a pain that they were virtually unusable. So I'm not sure how practical your plan is... Anyway, you probably need to talk to a template editor if you're serious – Gonnym is one I know. There are others, but the list of editors I know who are also template editors is a bit foggy at the moment... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:50, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Would it happen to be User:IJBall/tl:CUE and User:IJBall/tl:CUE/doc? Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:45, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Yep – That's the one! Which is weird, as I tried to see if my browser's URL line would pick it up if I typed "User:IJBall/tl", but nothing came up... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:22, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

I just looked this way. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:24, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Userspace templates are no different than any template in any space (as far as I'm aware, haven't seen any issues), so that shouldn't be a problem. As for what you want, that is pretty simple, when you copy the infobox, just add another field under the original release date like you want. --Gonnym (talk) 07:48, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above 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.

Toovey 123 and Bunk'd, List of Bunk'd episodes

I'm getting a WP:NOTHERE or WP:CIR vibe here. It's not their first time. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:50, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

List of Lupin III Part III episodes

List of Lupin III Part III episodes can you move this to the base name – Lupin III Part III which currently serves as a redirect to it. There is no other series article so there is no need for a list of separation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gonnym (talk • contribs) 11:24, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

@Gonnym:  Done. For the record, there probably needs to be a discussion about whether this suite of articles should be at "Lupin III" or "Lupin The Third" – it looks like the base article was moved from the former to the latter without discussion back in 2014, but based on the image shown in the infobox, it should be moved back to "Lupin III". FWIW... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:47, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Yeah, I saw that the move was not done via a discussion, but I was more concerned with matching season articles names to the base name and removing "list of" from season articles. --Gonnym (talk) 15:50, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Henry Danger

We have a secondary reliable source, which is preferable for this type of stuff—you even said so on the the talk page when people kept adding it without sourcing it—so I don't see the problem? Lack of mention on the series seems irrelevant, though where else would the last names come from if they weren't mentioned on the series at least once? To my knowledge, no one has called Cami Cameron on Coop & Cami Ask the World, but we have Disney ABC Press that supports that. Likewise for "Wrather. I can't remember too well, but I think Wrather has only been used with Cooper. If this were while the series was still being developed and hadn't premiered yet, I could see it since things change a lot between development and finalized work, but the series is well into its fifth season. Ping MPFitz1968 and Geraldo Perez for their thoughts as well. The main question is if we have a source, regardless of whether it's primary or secondary, that, for example, supports the last name of Smith for a character named John Smith, do we include it or not? My personal opinion is that, at least when it comes to names, if the name is supported, we include it. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:52, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

"Lack of mention on the series" is not "irrelevant" – it's the key point. Full character names are trivial if they are never used or referred to on the show. We've had this conversation several times... with Geraldo as well. This is straight from WP:TVCAST – "All names should be referred to as credited, or by common name..." (emphasis mine). This is why it's "Gibby" at iCarly and not "Orenthal Cornelius "Gibby" Gibson" (which was only mentioned in a single episode of iCarly.) Charlotte Page is not her "common name" by any stretch of the imagination. (Schwoz is even more clear – I don't think his full name has ever been said in any episode of the series!) I would actually say the surname shouldn't be included at all, but as you've got a source for it, I'm OK with that at the LoC page. But the character names should be the common names at the cast listing. (Which is why even including Jasper's surname is debatable.) Ditto in the headers at the LoC page. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:15, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

It's names per credits, sourcing, or WP:COMMONNAME? At least that's the reason all of us have given in reverts against various users. Credits are of course first in line in terms of determining names; if those aren't available, as is usually the case for main cast and, in a lot of cases, guest cast—for example, Beyond and Famous in Love—then we fall back to sourcing. WP:COMMONNAME is our "last resort" fallback if neither credits nor sourcing have support for any kind of name. For example, Shawn Christian on Famous in Love, who recurred as Alan, has the last name Mills, but it's not included—or at least it shouldn't be—since the credits do not show his character name and we are going by the COMMONNAME there since we also have no sourcing that supports Mills. On Bunk'd, for example, Lou Hockhauser and Xander McCormick are mentioned a handful of times during the series, yet we aren't including them. Similarly, as I stated above, Cami has never been called Cameron, as far as I know, on the series, but we have Disney ABC Press that supports that with no dispute. This is no different for Henry Danger, where we have sourcing that supports those last names, second in line to what we use for names. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:35, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

WP:OSE. Yeah, character names are handed badly at a lot of articles, and are handled inconsistently among WP:TV articles. For example, I would argue that it should just be "Cami" in the cast list at Coop & Cami, because I believe her full name was only mentioned in the pilot. (Ditto, Coop, though "Cooper" is used a lot more among the characters within the show...) A lot of IP editors (especially) are obsessed with listing full character names, even when they're not the obvious "common name" – that doesn't make it right. It is clear to anyone watching Henry Danger that the "common names" are "Charlotte" and "Schwoz" not "Charlotte Page" and "Schwoz Schwartz(?!)" – that's how they should be listed. The fact that there is a (single?) source, presumably quoting a Nick press release, giving the full character names, is nice for the LoC article, but is basically irrelevant to what their common names are and how they should be listed in cast listings. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:40, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

In Charlotte's case, interestingly enough, she's also had a last name of Bolton, according to IMDb. And I vaguely remember that being mentioned somewhere in the series. While Deadline Hollywood of course is more reliable than IMDb and therefore has higher priority, perhaps list nothing at all for her? Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:56, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

If Deadline is going off a Nick press release, I'd leave it. But you may need to add a {{cite episode}} 'note' to indicate that her surname was said to be something else in 'x' episode... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:04, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Notability of guest stars portraying younger or older versions of a main cast member/character

Unless they receive special guest star billing, which would make the point moot, does a guest star portraying a younger or an older version of a main character automatically make them notable or should the focus be more on who the person is? For example, Garrett Morris portraying Old Fizzwick in Knight Squad is notable—granted, Fizzwick isn't a main character, but still. I'm starting to have second thoughts on whether Young Ray is notable, who co-starred in "Back to the Danger, Part 1" and guest starred in "Back to the Danger, Part 2." I considered him notable because it shows us what happened to Captain Man and how he got his powers, but I don't know if that in itself makes him notable. If he received a special guest star credit, that would, again, be moot, but he didn't. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:56, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

I'd say, it depends. If it's a recurring thing, like "Young Jane" on Jane the Virgin (or, going way back, like the younger versions of the characters on Sisters), then I'd say "yes". But, if it's a one-shot guest appearance?... Let's put it this way – I would not give these their own "section" in a LoC article. What you could do is mention it in a sentence under "Captain Man" at the LoC article. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:02, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

TV series – Crashletes, Jagger Eaton's Mega Life, and The Dude Perfect Show

A la how you updated Paradise Run to "program," these may need to be updated to whatever is appropriate for them. Amaury (talk | contribs) 08:25, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Good point – I'll try to look at these over the next few days... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 08:26, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

I may need you at Crashletes and The Dude Perfect Show, depending on how things go. Another person violating WP:NOHURRY. In the past, I would have done that since Zap2it is often usually more up-to-date, but now that I think about it, it's WP:NOHURRY. The Futon Critic, which may be outdated, still lists February 15 for both series, so unless they cross that out and change it or the date passes and those episodes don't premiere, February 15 stays. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:56, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

On a related note, I wonder if Jagger Eaton's Mega Life had only been intended to be a one-season run. Not necessarily a limited show, as it did get a normal 20 episodes, but just a one-season run. I mean, there were a plethora of more places they could have visited, but hm... Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:37, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

It seems likely. Crashletes is the kind of reality show that you can run on and off for years, running it when you "need it". Mega Life seems like a "one off"... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:21, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

I've taken care of Crashletes as well Keep It Spotless and Bug Juice: My Adventures at Camp. Lip Sync Battle Shorties, too, but only because some areas were missed. The only one I didn't touch was The Dude Perfect Show, because I'm not sure. Per the press releases in there, it combines reality and comedy and it actually rolls credits at the beginning with the "starring" label, so does that mean it's scripted since scripted means series? I'm not totally sure. Add: Almost forgot. I left Jagger Eaton's Mega Life as is. It is akin to Bug Juice: My Adventures at Camp. There is no mention of just "series" anywhere in the prose, only docu-series, which is an actual genre. Docu-program would be incorrect. Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:07, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Any thoughts on The Dude Perfect Show? Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:37, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

If you're asking "Cast" vs. "Presenters" at Dude Perfect, I think considering them "Cast" is appropriate – they don't exactly operate as game show "hosts" as with the other shows.... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:39, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

No, I was asking whether this would be considered a program or a series: Per the press releases in there, it combines reality and comedy and it actually rolls credits at the beginning with the "starring" label, so does that mean it's scripted since scripted means series? I'm not totally sure. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:41, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Oh. I've kind of given up on that distinction, because nobody agrees on the definitions. My definition is: "standalone episodes = program" vs. "continuing storylines from episode-to-episode = series". Based on that, I'm guessing Dude Perfect would be a "program" under my definition. But there are other editors who will say anything with multiple-episodes and "seasons" is a "TV series" (which I don't agree with), so... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:44, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Well, I trust you more, so we'll go with that. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:58, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

List of Game Shakers episodes

Magitroopa has now shown up here—surprise!—and added unsourced content. Neither of the column sources support the information, and what they're trying to use cannot be used as eventually disappears. (And they can't be bothered to even provide a link.) Trying to get a handle on their WP:DE before it even starts. You're still watching the article, right? Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:14, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes, and yes I didn't agree with that edit either, as it was quoting the "Nick TV schedule" but never included any kind of link to it. It's the usual situation – if that episode does air on that date, it'll show up on either Zap2It or TFC soon enough. There's WP:NOHURRY. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:24, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

TFC should be updating with all of Nickelodeon's April premieres in the next few days. Amaury (talk | contribs) 03:26, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@Geraldo Perez: I don't know if you're still watching this, but please keep an eye on this as well. Thanks. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:22, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, and apologies for the lack of detail descriptions regarding the new episode of Game Shakers. Anyways, here to clear it up. Taking a look at FutonCritic regarding the episode in question, "Hot Bananas", it was originally scheduled to air on April 28, 2018, but was later however, removed. Now taking a look at Nickelodeon's official schedule, you can see that the episode in question is slated to air on April 6, 2019 at 8pm ET, and is listed as "new" (Image of episode on Nickelodeon's schedule). The final piece of this is relating Zap2it, and brings FutonCritic's April 28, 2018 listing back into attention. You are saying that we need to wait for Zap2it to update with the listing, however, it actually already has. The listing for the episode on April 6 is already there, but is however saying the episode already aired on April 27, 2018, which is clearly has not (Image of listings provided here). Due to it still thinking it did air then, the April 6 listing is currently not listed as "new", like it is on Nick's schedule. Hope this easily clears up all the confusion, and once again, apologies for the lack of description originally regarding this. Magitroopa (talk) 06:20, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

This is still a WP:NOHURRY situation about a WP:CRYSTAL-future event. Wikipedia is WP:NOTTVGUIDE, and we under no obligation to put out the "very latest scheduling info about upcoming episodes", esp. when such information is not readily available in a simple-to-add inline citation. I stand by what I said before – either Zap2It of The Futon Critic will update their listing in the next several days, and we can add the info about the upcoming episode then. There is literally WP:NOHURRY to add that info the instant it becomes available. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:18, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Knight Squad

@Geraldo Perez and MPFitz1968: You're all already watching this, but will need this to be kept a closer eye on for a while. Amaury (talk | contribs) 04:35, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Season appearances

As we know, if a series is currently on, say, its third season, it's pointless to have Actor as Character (season 3–present) since it's season 3 now and we therefore just have (season 3). Only if the series gets a fourth season and that character appears there would we do that. Now, like anything, there are exceptions. Even though Andi Mack is still airing its third season, it's probably appropriate to have (seasons 1–3) for Ham since his actor was fired during the third season? Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:44, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

I would say yes – when the odds of an actor/character coming back to a show are very low, I think it's OK to put an "end-date" on their appearances, even if the season isn't over yet. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:17, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done: [2]. I've also added a note; feel free to copy-edit it, if necessary. Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:05, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Fast Layne continuation

Just watched the season finale early on DisneyNOW. Based on the ending, which I won't spoil, another season is possible. I imagine limited series doesn't necessarily only mean one season, just not as many episodes—not even the standard 13 before usual back-orders are applied. Amaury (talk | contribs) 13:28, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

I Am Frankie

What are you hoping to see in the third season? Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:18, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Disney Asia vandal

They're striking again (another of those 180.190.0.0/16 IPs) at a Disney Channel series, Elena of Avalor (which could use some more eyes) [3][4]. They sure like to talk about Disney Channel Southeast Asia and their schedule, specifically about how the series they're putting content into is gonna be (or is) affected by other programs, which is clearly irrelevant to the article (despite being mentioned). Like, in the above edits, what does Andi Mack being acquired by the channel have to do with what Elena of Avalor is about? Plus, no sources. MPFitz1968 (talk) 05:59, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@MPFitz1968: If they are persistently doing it this time, I would take it to WP:AIV, and see if they might do a range block... Add: Failing that, it might be time to ask for an edit filter (WP:EF/R). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 12:15, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Andi Mack

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.

---

See page history. I know you generally don't watch this and you've explained why, but we seem to have an issue with the recent editor who edited the article lately. (It's not an issue with the article itself.) I'm not necessarily asking you to watch it, but please continue reading below.

The general problem here is their known WP:PREVIEW and WP:EDITSUMMARY issues. I left them a note here, but they later blanked the page here, which they have the right per WP:BLANK, but it's obvious they didn't read it as they failed again earlier. And we're not the only ones with these concerns. See User talk:Amaury/2019#Edit summaries. They also reintroduced the LGBT category here and pointed to the Talk:Andi Mack#The LGBT category discussion, but I'll leave the decision on whether that should be reverted or not to you or the others. Note, though, that he and another editor are the only ones who supported it back in February, but that does not seem to be overwhelming consensus. And for something like this, overwhelming consensus to include it is probably needed, in my opinion.

I don't know if this is something that warrants something like WP:ANI, and I don't necessarily really want to drag them there; however, I think I kind of agree with the observation made in that linked to discussion in my archives that there's some ownership. Remember that, for example, when I removed the size parameter for the image on the parent article because I thought it was too big, they were quick to revert it. I know we discussed it at User talk:IJBall/Archive 21#Image size? and it seemed defining the size was correct, but they still should have followed proper procedures and started a discussion on the talk page. Ownership of articles can drive people away, and it's why I just left Champions and don't watch anything outside of the Nickelodeon and Disney Channel articles in general.

Pinging Geraldo Perez and MPFitz1968 as well on this for thoughts. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:01, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, but I ain't touchin' this one! – that Andi Mack article has been a tar pit of bad editing, IMO, and I'd rather steer well clear of it... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:05, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

It's your choice, of course. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:13, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Only sticking to articles I actually want to edit is the surest way to avoid "burnout", IMO. Every time I look at the Andi Mack article, it just makes me annoyed, and it's not even a show I watch, so I'd rather just steer clear of it. (Let's face it – we have enough to deal with at the articles we actually want to watch!!) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:50, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above 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.

Fast Layne season 1

https://twitter.com/DisneyChannel/status/1113924258839896064 Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:10, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

I actually saw a good chunk of the "marathon" before the finale first aired, so I'm pretty much "up to speed" on this one now... I liked it OK, but it definitely skewed "young" – it felt like it was targeted at pre-tweens. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:32, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Cooper Barnes (actor)

@Geraldo Perez and MPFitz1968: Already tagged with PROD. WP:TOOSOON and fails to meet WP:NACTOR and WP:BASIC. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:24, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

I feel like we've had issues like this with the editor who created this article before. I don't think they grasp what our notability guidelines are – citing TV Guide just verifies that Barnes was in the cast of the show; but it doesn't contribute to notability at all. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:39, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Henry Danger breaking records

User talk:IJBall/Archive 23#Nickelodeon: However, it's worth noting that Nick probably has enough episodes of Henry Danger now to last them another year.

That's even more true now. Hell, even though they're just extensions, we basically have two more seasons, a fifth and a sixth with 20 episodes apiece. Amaury (talk | contribs) 23:21, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

You know what I don't understand...

Aren't series supposed to be renewed while one season is still airing and/or before the next season goes into production? The Conners, for example, ended its first season back in January, though it wasn't renewed until March due to negotiations for the next season. Stuck in the Middle was renewed for a third season on August 31, 2017, while the second season was still airing. Production did not start until September 11, 2017, according to the wiki.

• Bunk'd was supposedly renewed for a third season back in March 2017 while the second season was still airing. (Remember that casting call?) However, it was never announced until the same time Stuck in the Middle's third season was announced. Production began on October 15, 2017, according to the wiki.
• Henry Danger was renewed for a fifth season last year in July when production had already been going on for a while.
• Likewise, I Am Frankie is currently filming season three, with 15 episodes produced so far. According to the wikia, Nickelodeon apparently announced it back on January 20, but of course we don't have anything official from them at that time.
• Bizaardvark's renewal was "announced" by the two lead stars on April 30 last year, shortly after the second season ended, but it was never officially confirmed by Disney Channel.
• Similarly, Raven Symoné confirmed Raven's Home season three on October 10, 2018, while the second season was still airing, but Disney Channel never officially announced that one, either. The only thing we have from Disney Channel is the new EP announcement for the third season on November 28, 2018, but that is not technically a renewal announcement.

Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:17, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Even on the broadcast nets, plenty of shows are renewed after they finish airing new episodes for a season. This is probably even more likely to happen with "cable" TV series. But Disney Channel and Nick are off in their own little words where they do things very differently. And, yeah – I have seen or heard nothing that "officially" confirms a third season of I Am Frankie... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:23, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Boy Meets World navigation template at List of Girl Meets World episodes

I recall your edit at the article [5], about a week ago, removing the template. Since then, two different IPs have attempted to restore the template to the article, but I've reverted those (and sticking by the removal). Probably will need to commence a talk page discussion over there if this continues. MPFitz1968 (talk) 19:20, 7 April 2019 (UTC)