Talk:Saturday Night Live (season 34)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Television / Episode coverage (Rated List-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of television on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the episode coverage task force.
 

Will Season 34 could be Darrell Hammond's 14th season on SNL did he decides to come back? Punctuation helps. Darrell will probably come back, because of John McCain. But, nothing is set in stone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.65.126.59 (talk) 01:16, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Amy Poehler[edit]

I think what Amy Poehler is going to do is she's absolutely gone, but she'll do what Jan Hooks did in seasons 17, 18, and 19. She'll make special guest appearances to do the political sketches. --72.73.90.224 (talk) 12:26, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Episode airdates[edit]

What is the source to that that there will be 8 back-to-back episodes of SNL during this fall? They rarely do more than 3 episodes in a row, although they might do more now, when it's an election year. 80.221.30.68 (talk) 19:32, 30 August 2008 (UTC) It was heavily talked about after it was released by NBCUMV in July. It was sourced, but was taken down. [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.73.98.60 (talk) 20:15, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thats enough[edit]

who ever keeps on deleting the cast needs to stop it. --72.73.91.90 (talk) 00:41, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Whoever keeps adding a cast list without citing sources (or waiting for the season to begin) needs to stop it, per Wikipedia rules: WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:RS, WP:CITE. Ward3001 (talk) 00:58, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

The Cast[edit]

Hey, Ward...Do you have a source saying that anyone in the cast will NOT return? Unless you can find some piece of credible evidence saying that someone who WAS there last season won't be there this year, then the cast should remain the same as it was before you erased it. We know about the situation with Amy leaving sometime soon, and we know about the new castmember, Bobby Moynihan, but other than that, what changes will there be? If someone else was leaving the show, we would know about it. So, at least for now, the cast needs to be put back to where it was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snlfan (talkcontribs) 19:58, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

"Unless you can find some piece of credible evidence saying that someone who WAS there last season won't be there this year, then the cast should remain the same as it was before you erased it": Snlfan, you are unequivocally wrong. This is quite fundamental policy on Wikipedia. The burden of proof for adding to an article is on the person who adds it. And the article for Season 34 is not the same as the article for Season 33, so everything, including the cast, is being added, not retained from previous edits. Read WP:V. I've seen people try to use this argument in the past ("I can add anything I want if no one can provide evidence that it shouldn't be there") and it never works. It is a demand to prove a negative, which is logically impossible. With that kind of logic, I could add a statement to George W. Bush that he likes to have sex with children and then demand that it stay in the article unless someone can prove that it is not true.
One more point. This is an encylcopedia, not a newspaper. We can wait three days until the season begins, or until someone provides a source. Ward3001 (talk) 00:30, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Enough is enough!!! Something has got to be done about this guy who is a self proclaimed Snlfan, because I've had enough of reverting his edits. - Jasonbres (talk) 20:14, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
I agree. Editors like him who are oblivious to policies even after they are pointed out, who self-appoint themselves as owners of articles, and who brazenely think they can do as they please are not only quite annoying, they are a detriment to Wikipedia in general. He has violated WP:V and WP:3RR multiple times. If the addition of unsourced information occurs again, I'm reporting at WP:AIV, WP:AN3, and WP:ANI. Ward3001 (talk) 22:04, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
While I was blocked from editing, I found a very varifiable source that states that the cast is returning. It is a photo of the cast dated September 10, 2008 on NBCUMV.com. So I'm sure that everyone is happy now. - Jasonbres (talk) 23:05, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for finally adding the cast. I never thought I'd see the day where the truth actually came out--and only a couple days after I told you the same thing. Good job. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snlfan (talkcontribs) 23:14, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Good job researching this, Jasonbres. Ward3001 (talk) 00:09, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Recent C-SPAN bailout sketch censored[edit]

Should there be mention of the rapidly becoming infamous bailout sketch self censorship? I don't know what would be considered valid for sources as no "mainstream" news media have mentioned it yet, but NBC/SNL took down the clip and then reposted after editing out a line of dialogue and the identifier of the couple at the heart of the issue. There is no official explanation (as yet) but word around the campfire is that it's a legal issue related to what was said/on screen given the people in that part of the sketch are real people tied to the current financial meltdown. Whether on the SNL main article or here, it's at least interesting to note that this might be the first time they have self-censored an internet clip AFTER they had already posted it in it's entirety once before. 144.92.84.206 (talk) 21:44, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

If it's not in the "mainstream" media, then how did you hear about it? If you got it from tabloids or gossip column/websites, it could very well not be true. But it must have a reliable source to be mentioned in the article. Ward3001 (talk) 23:49, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
First off, I said I hadn't seen it in a "mainstream" news source which just means I may not have tried hard enough to find one (I honestly don't care that much, just thought this whole thing was interesting). Second, I didn't hear about it, I saw the original airing, then watched it again when it was on the NBC site, then noticed that it was pulled without explanation (and also noticed that every time someone left a comment about it, the comments were deleted but that's a whole 'nother can of tuna), and then watched it when it was reposted and compared it to the clips other people put up and saw that I was right, they censored themselves. And third, just because I don't readily have a "mainstream" source doesn't mean it didn't happen. I get the lawyer mentality Wiki fosters and the reasoning behind it, but it's annoying when you can know something first hand but not have the irrefutable academic journal documentation to satisfy everyone that it's not just a figment of the imagination. OH and here's the LA Times take on this: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2008/10/nbc-yanks-then.html144.92.84.206 (talk) 12:48, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Let me suggest that you read WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL before personalizing this issue. As for the "lawyering mentality", Wikipedia does not require "academic journal documentation", just a reliable source. And the reason Wikipedia is not satisfied if your only evidence is that you "know something first hand" is that any of us (myself included) can know lots of things first hand that might not have a shred of truth. I could claim that I "know first hand" that the moon is made of cheese, but that doesn't make it true. If I submitted an article to Encyclopædia Britannica and only offer as evidence that "I know it first hand", what do you think the odds are that they will publish it? And finally, you might want to register a username instead of editing anonymously. It's easy, fast, and free. Ward3001 (talk) 15:16, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Sarah Palin Appearance[edit]

I was just wondering if it is wise to add in the fact that Sarah Palin will appear on an episode of SNL , at least just yet. I know there is a source from Cindy Adams, who is a gossip columnist but I have heard conflicting reports from Seth Meyers and Lorne Micheals on whether she will or will not appear. Should we omit it and place it back when and if she appears or should we add in the word "rumoured" until the airing of the show? Thanks76.71.239.25 (talk) 07:44, 11 October 2008 (UTC) samusek2

Are We Sure?[edit]

Are we sure Amy's officialy off the show? She was expecting to be in the Jon Hamm episode before she went into labor, and she's still credited as a cast-member.--BrianGriffin-FG (talk) 19:11, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there is source cited in the article. Ward3001 (talk) 19:40, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Coldplay/Obama[edit]

It's not relevant to include a popular band's endorsement of a popular candidate. It is simply not newsworthy. If they had come out in support of a candidate with a smaller following, such as Nader or Barr, then it would be worth mentioning. So please stop reverting the article to include Chris Martin's statement. User:Lew19 (talk) 18:03, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

So far two editors have disagreed with you by restoring the statement about Chris Martin's shout (Doc Strange and myself). Unless you get a consensus otherwise here, the information remains in the article, per WP:CON. Ward3001 (talk) 18:09, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Consensus or not, why is it important? User:Lew19 (talk) 18:17, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

First, let me say I'm not getting into an endless debate with you. That tends to happen when only two editors have expressed an opinion on a talk page. I have already stated in my edit summaries that when a performer goes off script in a potentially controversial way, it may have notability (and, in my opinion, this does). Sinéad O'Connor and other performers have been banned from SNL for that very reason. But it doesn't take being banned to make it noteworthy enough to include in Wikipedia. Even when Madonna parodied O'Connor, it was noted in the Wikipedia article. Although Martin's actions are not as controversial as O'Connor's, that doesn't mean they have no controversy, especially in an election season. Obama's lead in the race has nothing to do with how notable this event is; it would apply equally if he had shouted "John McCain". Now, all of that having been said, let's see whether a consensus emerges. Feel free to respond to my comments, but unless other editors weigh in, that's the end of my comments on this issue. Ward3001 (talk) 18:31, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Sinéad O'Connor's actions were more religious than political, which is a whole different issue. She was angry toward a religious leader while Chris Martin was showing support for a candidate who doesn't really need any more endorsements. User:Lew19 (talk) 18:34, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

One final comment and that's it for me. The Catholic/Protestant/Northern Ireland issue is more political than religious. But as I said, the controversial off-script behavior does not have to be that extreme to be noteworthy enough for Wikipedia. Ward3001 (talk) 18:40, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Now that the elections are over, it's no longer relevant. --72.87.63.203 (talk) 22:36, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Justin Timberlake hosting[edit]

I got rid of the Justin Timberlake mention for next weekès episode as although Justin mentioned that he was "supposed" to host, there has been no proof of it. What I mean is, they may have just brought him on this week and made it look like he was supposed to host the Thanksgiving episode just to have him on the show (at the same time as Beyonce. It may have all been a set-up or Justin might have been telling the truth. I have not heard any confirmation. So I request we take that statement off of the Tim McGraw episode part for the time being76.71.238.147 (talk) 23:01, 17 November 2008 (UTC) samusek2

Did you watch the show? It was announced on air that McGraw will host. Do you think this is some elaborate hoax by the SNL producers to fool their viewers by saying that McGraw will host and then Timberlake shows up? And you don't need "written proof" if it's announced on air. That's the way it's been done for a very long time here. Please use a bit of common sense. Ward3001 (talk) 00:09, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I am using common sense. I know Tim McGraw will host. That is for sure. What I am uncertain about is the fact that what Justin mentioned on Weekend Update was in fact reality or just part of a sketch on Weekend Update. Justin may have only been scheduled for last week's episode because of Beyonce's appearance on the show and the fact that they have collaborated recently. We are not positive if Justin was ever scheduled to host the Thanksgiving episode or he was just doing it as part of a Weekend Update sketch. That's why I was asking for written proof, because,SNL is a sketch comedy show, they write sketches, that whole SNL in 5 minutes could have been a whole made up thing.

I know for a fact that Tim is 100% hosting. What I am not positive is whether Tim was a replacement host or was he always going to host no matter what. I hope that makes some sense to you76.71.238.147 (talk) 00:22, 18 November 2008 (UTC) samusek2

Ah, my apologies! Now I see your point. I have no problem if you remove the statement. Ward3001 (talk) 00:32, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

MGMT Musical Guest?[edit]

I don't see citation on the matter under the Tim McGraw/Ludacris, T-Pain episode notes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.87.63.203 (talk) 13:27, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

I removed MGMT as unsourced. Ward3001 (talk) 15:41, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

WP:CRYSTAL[edit]

Water78 (talk · contribs) has repeatedly added episode dates and episode numbers through the end of the season, in direct violation of WP:CRYSTAL. I will not revert any time soon because of 3RR, but I wanted editors to be aware of this policy violation. Ward3001 (talk) 22:46, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Taylor Swift was in a sketch?[edit]

What sketch and who did she play? - Jasonbres (talk) 05:15, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

She was Annie (wearing a red wig) in the sketch about Broadway. Ward3001 (talk) 05:17, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. - Jasonbres (talk) 05:20, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Seth Rogen IS hosting[edit]

Seth Rogen is hosting until otherwise is said. It's been confirmed by 2 articles, and they're both sourced. Please do not take it down until it is proven wrong. --Connerb312 (talk) 19:57, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Then please provide the source. It's not sourced. Ward3001 (talk) 21:02, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Already did it for 'im. - Jasonbres (talk) 21:04, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for picking up after others! Ward3001 (talk) 21:06, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Don't mention it. - Jasonbres (talk) 21:10, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I really thought I did. Maybe I did something wrong. Sorry! --Connerb312 (talk) 23:22, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Taylor Knocks Over a Chair[edit]

Okay, i put up a note on the Neil Patrick Harris episode. In the live episode, it cuts to Jason before Taylor Swift knocks over the chair, and in reruns, it cuts to him after she knocks it over. I don't have a refrence, but I DVRed the episode, I watched the scetch multiple times, noticed how out of place the cutaway was, made a mental note, deleated the epiosde (stupid me!), then DVRed a rerun, and noticed they "fixed" the cut. I know this happened! I saw it with my own eyes!

I'll try and find the original sketch and the rerun sketch. Please don't take it down. Lsnicket (talk) 23:10, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Removed 'Listings' section[edit]

I have begun removing the "Listings" sections from SNL Seasons articles because they consistently fail WP:NOTDIR policy concerns. You can find the main discussion here: Talk:List of Saturday Night Live episodes#.27Listings.27 sections on Seasons pages. -- Wikipedical (talk) 00:42, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

  1. ^ SNL Front-loads for the fall