Jump to content

Talk:She-Hulk: Attorney at Law: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Line 323: Line 323:


Is it important to add the cast breakdown? It's not adding anything specific.[[Special:Contributions/223.187.252.51|223.187.252.51]] ([[User talk:223.187.252.51|talk]]) 12:18, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
Is it important to add the cast breakdown? It's not adding anything specific.[[Special:Contributions/223.187.252.51|223.187.252.51]] ([[User talk:223.187.252.51|talk]]) 12:18, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

== Cast Breakdown Importance ==

Is it important to add the cast breakdown? It's not adding anything specific.[[Special:Contributions/223.187.252.51|223.187.252.51]] ([[User talk:223.187.252.51|talk]]) 12:20, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:20, 25 October 2022

Cast breakdown

Breakdown of each episode's main on-end billing, plus cast list. Actors in bold indicate the first appearance of the character, with the episodes they appear in after.

—El Millo (talk) 18:46, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Including Maliah Arrayah

Why are you not including the On Set She Hulk Reference woman? She is listed with the rest of the cast in the episode credits.

CoolDudeAl (talk) 14:11, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

From the article proper: 6-foot-7-inch (2.01-meter) Maliah Arrayah served as the on-set reference and body double for She-Hulk. DonQuixote (talk) 16:26, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Special:Diff/1109265494. — SirDot (talk) 17:03, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, I mean why are we not including it on this talk page. I'm aware it's in the article. CoolDudeAl (talk) 19:44, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page is a place to discuss how to improve the article. It's not the article. DonQuixote (talk) 19:53, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Because she's a "technical" credit. We don't actually see Arrayah appear on screen. In the same way that Oscar Isaac's brother was his on set double, we don't need to track this. The real purpose of this is to help quickly see who may or may not be a recurring character in the series, and Arrayah's already noted in the article. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:41, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, gotcha. That makes sense, and like you said people like her and Oscar Isaac's brother get mentioned in the articles under the character they were "doubling" or "referencing" for anyway. CoolDudeAl (talk) 01:24, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nielsen ratings

To avoid further edit warring, I am going to open a discussion about the Nielsen ratings that Gaius Sallustius Crispus has been trying to add, with Centcom08 as the one reverting. Looking at the edits and its respective summaries (+ searching on Google), it seems like the detail has not been covered by reliable sources and might not be important for inclusion in the article. So, should the detail about She-Hulk not being included in Nielsen's Top 10 ratings be included in the article? (And it seems like we haven't included Nielsen ratings in the other articles...) Jolly1253 (talk) 14:32, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If we have to search for reliable sources in order to support something, then it's probably not that notable. DonQuixote (talk) 15:03, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with DonQuixote. We would be giving undue weight to something that's not notable enough to have been widely covered by notable sources.— Starforce13 15:15, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Concur. Making the Nielsen SVOD rankings would be worth including since it's often repeated by places like THR, Deadline, etc. (Otherwise, the way the list is set up, it'd be lost to the ether the next week.) However, not making the top 10 is inclusive of an exorbitant number of shows every week, which is not notable. If this was considered some kind of catastrophic failure to miss the top 10, then that might be worth including, but in that case, it would be reported in secondary sources. -2pou (talk) 15:21, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Reliable sources usually just cover the top 10 series each week and the premiere was not in the top 10 for minutes watched. -- Zoo (talk) 16:11, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Variety eventually released an article corroborating this, and the show did make the Streaming Top 10 for Aug 22 - 28. I readded the section to include both pieces of information, and now that it has made the list it is less likely to incite anger.
https://variety.com/2022/streaming/news/house-of-the-dragon-echoes-nielsen-top-10-streaming-1235380571/ Gaius Sallustius Crispus (talk) 14:52, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also to be clear it is the fact that it was the first Marvel show to not do so which makes it a noteworthy thing to include. Gaius Sallustius Crispus (talk) 14:55, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There's really only one piece of relevant information to add:
  1. This show's premiere had the lowest viewership of any Marvel TV show premiere so far, failing to make any Top 10 lists the week of its premiere. There are many sources that mention and commentate on this: - Variety: https://variety.com/2022/streaming/news/house-of-the-dragon-echoes-nielsen-top-10-streaming-1235380571/ - GameRant: https://gamerant.com/she-hulk-nielsen-streaming-charts-fail-marvel-studios/ - Youtube videos with 100k+ views.
In my edits, I tried to avoid that specific phrasing in order to split the difference, but there are viewers pretty intent on sanitizing the information from this article.
I think we have more than established the relevance of the premiere's viewership, but I'd like to find the best way to include it. Ideally, we could add a table for viewership or include it as a column in the existing episodes table, and include information for all episodes so that the mention of its relative poor viewership is not the sole focus of the change.
But I am pretty adamant we not sanitize the information regarding the premiere's viewership. Gaius Sallustius Crispus (talk) 15:44, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In light of the new source provided above, together with GameRant's article about this, I'm going to open this discussion again to decide that this should be included or not. Although I've contributed by helping to move the references and editing the format of the templates, I'm still uncertain about including this in the article. It has since been removed (I disagree with the edit summary, though). Jolly1253 (talk) 07:51, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As pointed out above, most shows aren't in the top ten. Also, unless there's an in-depth analysis, it's just trivia at this point (WP:NOTEVERYTHING and WP:INDISCRIMINATE). DonQuixote (talk) 10:56, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This was the first Marvel show to not make the Top 10 its opening week, as the sources mention, which is perfectly noteworthy and has been covered in multiple places and YouTube videos. See also Variety Magazine at https://variety.com/2022/streaming/news/house-of-the-dragon-echoes-nielsen-top-10-streaming-1235380571/.
It's the lowest-viewership premiere of any Marvel TV show so far, which is certainly noteworthy. I do think this specific phrasing would draw more ire though. I believe the information should be included in a least-biased way as possible, but it's perfectly relevant and noteworthy. Gaius Sallustius Crispus (talk) 14:04, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think ultimately the best way to do this would be to include all of the ratings for all of the episodes (relevant) and mention the premiere viewership offhand, so it is not the only information as to viewership. But it's all clearly relevant information that we don't need to sanitize from the page. Gaius Sallustius Crispus (talk) 14:06, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Variety article does not state that it is the first Marvel series to miss the top ten, nor does it state that it has the lowest ratings of any Marvel series. Gamerant is a dubious source at best, as can be confirmed by the author’s credentials when accessing the article.
Whether or not missing the top ten, per Variety, is notable enough to include would be the question. Seems completely WP:Undue to me. 2604:2D80:6A8D:E200:DD5:AB65:5DBC:2016 (talk) 21:24, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ms. Marvel missed the top 10 multiple weeks, which was the first time one of the live action MCU series did that. Also have to keep in mind the length of episodes as the top 10 is comprised of minutes watched each week. -- Zoo (talk) 21:44, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but its premiere did place at #10.
https://whatsondisneyplus.com/ms-marvel-debuts-on-the-nielsen-streaming-chart/ Gaius Sallustius Crispus (talk) 17:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I see what you're saying. It turns out that this claim was effectively not correct, as She-Hulk got more viewership minutes (390M) than Ms Marvel (357M) and also more households tuned in.
It's still probably relevant to mention it being the first show to fail to make the Top 10 as a relative measure, and this was noteworthy enough to be covered by multiple sources, but all of this information should be included at the same time. Gaius Sallustius Crispus (talk) 17:32, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review bombing

Should we include the review-bombing of the film, I mean it is going on and it even got into the news? Dangervest69 (talk) 01:04, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not, user voted scores in easily rigged online polls are not something that belongs in an encyclopedia article (see WP:UGC and WP:TVRECEPTION) it just doesn't seem noteworthy. Maybe if reliable mainstream WP:SECONDARY sources actually say something about audience reaction that might be worth mentioning that, but any alleged review bombing is only of interest because of what it says about audience response. (I'm very skeptical of the overall Rotten Tomatoes scores for any TV series because they are so heavily biased in favor of only a few preview episodes given to critics for review, and are not representative of the full season or series as a whole.)
It would be better if the article included Nielsen ratings or other more reliable types of information, but it takes a little longer for that kind of detail to become available. -- 109.78.207.72 (talk) 04:27, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I didn't see this earlier, I included a couple quick lines citing a handful of articles regarding the review bombing, and that it might be partially to blame for the series' 35% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. Is that fine? AKA Casey Rollins Talk With Casey 20:07, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All info that was added came from unreliable sources. IP editor is correct that it isn't, as far as I've seen, discussed in length by reliable secondary sourcing. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:49, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Height of Maliah Arrayah

Article gives 6ft 7in but many online sources state just (sic) 6ft 5in. Is there a definitive reference? --AlisonW (talk) 18:22, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The two sources used in article confirm this, as discussed/revealed by Coiro. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:31, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cast Breakdown Importance

Is it important to add the cast breakdown? It's not adding anything specific.223.187.252.51 (talk) 12:18, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cast Breakdown Importance

Is it important to add the cast breakdown? It's not adding anything specific.223.187.252.51 (talk) 12:20, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:She-Hulk:_Attorney_at_Law&oldid=1118144265"