Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:40, 26 November 2008

Television Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Misplaced Pages articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Episode titles

Hi, folks. I've just finished moving a number of these episodes from names like Beyond the Veil (episode) to Beyond the Veil (The Outer Limits), as recommended by the naming conventions guideline at WP:NC-TV. The problem with using (episode) as a disambiguator is that sometimes different television series will use the same episode name — see the "television and film" examples at Awakening or Identity crisis for examples. It's also worth remembering that you don't need to put any disambiguation on a title that's unique, like The Revelations of Becka Paulson. This is also noted at WP:NC-TV, and is in keeping with general Misplaced Pages disambiguation guidelines at WP:DAB. This is just a little clean-up and a friendly reminder. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:30, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Redirection ("merger") of The Outer Limits episodes

Redirection ("merger") of 1995 to 2002 episodes

All The Other Limits (1995-2002) episode articles are WP:STUBs, don't establish WP:NOTABILITY, consist of nothing but plot (WP:NOT#PLOT) and quotes (which should be moved to WikiQuote). Since I believed that there are no TOL-enthusiastic editors to fix that (the last TOL episode aired over six years ago), I bold-merged these stubs into this List of episodes. Concerns about the legitimity of this action led to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/The Galaxy Being, which showed mixed reactions. I have therefore started to restore the TOL episode articles (seasons 5-7 so far) with added {{notability}} tags and hope to find merge consensus afterwards (i.e. now). If the articles continue to lack a raison d'être (see first two sentences), I truly believe that the episode summaries are better covered in an LoE (or season article), with no prejudice against recreation if someone wants to write a proper article per WP:EPISODE. Please avoid recommending to keep the articles if you don't plan to work on them, since that just adjourns any kind of article improvement (whether through encyclopedic expansion or merging). – sgeureka 08:23, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

My opinion is that the 1995-2002 episodes are generally non-notable, with some exceptions. It's the 1964-65 episodes that should be restored to their own articles. --Captain Infinity (talk) 19:21, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I have started a new merge thread below. – sgeureka

Thank you for taking the time to restore these episodes. Perhaps not all the episodes of the new TOL are notable, but many of them are, even if this series has not yet quite achieved the cult status (yet?) of the old series. And like the old series, the episodes of the new series are also independent stories with little or no continuity between them, which is another strong reason why they should be treated more like movies are, as individual films, not as episodes of a serial story.

My opinion is that of a viewer/Wikipedia user, by the way. Here in Ottawa, TOL is shown daily on a cable channel, and more than once I found myself using Misplaced Pages to get additional information about the episode in question. It was quite an unpleasant surprise when the episode articles suddenly disappeared! Vttoth (talk) 22:03, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate your comments. I'll note nevertheless that what appears in this list of episodes now are nearly identical plot summaries from what appeared in the articles, so all that changed was a matter of representation (the rest shouldn't have been there in the first place). Secondly, (and I say this because/although I know where you're coming from)[REDACTED] is not a replacement for watching a show. – sgeureka 12:31, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Before I restore any more articles, I want to see some more input from others. That I was expecting lack of input was exactly the reason why I bold-merged the episodes in the first place, and it seems I wasn't that far off. (Why start discussions when there is no-one to discuss things with?) – sgeureka 16:33, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

See my answer below.Krasss (talk) 00:15, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

It is a questionable rationale to use the absence of a discussion a reason to delete (let's call a spade a spade; sure, the article histories will still be there, but unless you know what you're looking for, the articles are as good as deleted). Most users of Misplaced Pages don't routinely check the discussion page to see if the article they're reading is about to be deleted. They only complain, as I do, when they suddenly do disappear. Misplaced Pages, like a good encyclopedia, is about providing information. I consulted Misplaced Pages when I was looking for background information on these shows. Suddenly, a lot of that information vanished, for no good reason other than somebody's idea of "cleaning up". What are we trying to do here, turn Misplaced Pages into a Reader's Digest version that only has popular stuff in it? vttoth (talk) 04:30, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

The plot summaries "vanished" into the LoE, i.e. they didn't vanish at all; the redirects redirected you to each summary in the LoE. The rest of the articles (quotes, cast list and unsourced trivia) was material that shouldn't have been there in the first place (if you disagree, please provide a link to an episode GA or FA ep article that has them). I'd also argue that the articles are much more likely to be kept if editors provide good reasons why the articles shouldn't be merged (volunteering for improvement would be a good start), instead of dissecting and trivializing my intentions. – sgeureka 10:42, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Redirection ("merger") of 1963 to 1965 episodes

The rationale for merging the 1963-1965 episode articles is nearly identical to that of the 1995-2002 ep articles, with the (some would say huge) difference that notability is not so much the problem (I only realize this now), but the shape of the articles - nearly all of them are sourced entirely from primary sources. When I restored the articles, I have therefore not tagged them for {{notability}}, but {{primary sources}}. It is now a matter of philosophy to keep article stub around for more-or-less notable subjects, or merge the plot summaries (nearly in full) to a list of episodes or a season list until someone wants to improve them the standard set by the TOL ep article The Galaxy Being (or Soldier (The Outer Limits) and Demon with a Glass Hand, although those lack the sources). I prefer the latter option, but I am not as adamant about this here than I am/would be for the 1995-2002 articles. – sgeureka 12:31, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

• I agree with Sgeureka on this one. Merge. Eusebeus (talk) 23:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Why did you started a new discussion?

The discussion about merging/deleting was finished, and result is clear (see Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/The Galaxy Being). Why did you started a new discussion?

This current discussion that you initiated is not about merging, — so as the episodes' summaries are still merged to this List of Episodes. The current question is about deleting the original articles.

The reason of existing of individual articles of TOL episodes is not planning (or not planning) to work about them. The real reason is that there are some people who are glad to see these articles here. If you are not interested in The Outer Limits, or believe that these films has no any importance, — please edit some other articles, you are really interested in. Krasss (talk) 00:15, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Per discussions at Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion/Archive_48#AfD_consensus_and_future_article_discussions, it is perfectly fine to immediately start merge discussions after AfDs that resulted in keep. Redirection is not deletion and never was because the page histories stay around. The opinion of TOL fans has no more weight than that of any other wikipedian, so my liking or not liking TOL is immaterial to this merge discussion (in fact, it could be argued that non-fans have less of a WP:COI than TOL fans and are more objective what's best). I have explained why I think merging is the best way to go, and now others should share why not merging is even better. WP:ILIKEIT has always been a poor reason to keep articles. – sgeureka 00:48, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

About images

Also, due to yours vandalism, many images that was used in the TOL episodes (see, for example, from the article The Camp) were deleted as "non used images". So, what do you think, who now must re-create these images? Krasss (talk) 00:40, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Please read WP:VANDALISM before accusing editors of vandalism. Feel free to ask an admin to restore the images (I don't have admin powers), but since the images failed WP:NFCC#8 anyway, I wouldn't bother. – sgeureka 00:48, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I know that you're not an admin. You must note that removing of these images is one of direct results of your own "merging". Krasss (talk) 17:36, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

• Unassessed television articles
• Unknown-importance television articles
• WikiProject Television articles