Talk:Sam & Cat

Series premiere in January?

It says "The series will premiere on Nickelodeon in the United States sometime in January 2013" in the article. However, the source indicates that production will start in January ("with production set to begin in January in Los Angeles for a 2013 premiere"). Can someone fix this? Thanks. -98.116.110.176 (talk) 20:23, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

 Done--Astros4477 (talk) 20:46, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry! I meant to just say 2013. Thanks for pointing it out :) --DylanGLC2011 (talk) 21:03, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Examiner.com as a reference

Examiner.com is in the Wikipedia:Spam blacklist, reason for addition is at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/October 2009#Examiner.com, basically it is not a reliable source and should not ever be used as a reference. Being on the spam blacklist means that adding a citation using a url to this site will not be permitted and the edit attempting to do that rejected. I originally put it in the article using an archived link to the reference but circumventing the black list this way is not a proper use of the archiving tool. See also discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 38#Request to reopen discussion on examiner.com for more background. I removed the cite and info it supported because examiner.com has been determined to not be a reliable source. --Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:43, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

The citation I removed was 'Baltes, Alan (January 22, 2013). "Nickelodeon auditions for iCarly and Victorious spinoff series ". Examiner.com. {{cite web}}: |archive-url= requires |url= (help); Missing or empty |url= (help)' in case someone wants to find a reliable source replacement. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:33, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about hat I thoht it was a reliable source. It seemed to be okay. WP Editor 2012 (talk) 18:54, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Show logo

I removed the logo image as I could not find any Nickelodeon official site that hosted it, and I did a fairly extensive search for it. Lots on net but none are hosted by a Nick site. Mostly on blogs and wikias and fan pages. Might have originated from Nick or it might be fan-art. Source of image should originate from a reliable source, preferably Nickelodeon, before declared "official". Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:31, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

The logo is on Dan's Twitter Page. If you go and look in the background on the left side you will see it. To see the logo fully scroll down a bit. If you view his pictures from his twitter, you will see the pic on the actors title cards from a couple weeks ago. The pic was taken Jan 31.Don't realy know though if it will work. Also on a side note, Can I use that Pi as a refference for that actor. His twitter is not confimred yet. But he is a main actor on the show. Or Can I use a tweeet from Jenntte(think itas hers) Saying it what fun it is working with him. With the linked twitter.WP Editor 2012 (talk) 13:29, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

I put the logo back using https://twitter.com/DanWarp as the source of the image. The image is part of the background on Dan Schneider's verified twitter page so is about as official as we can get so far until Nickelodeon hosts something or get a screencap from an aired episode.

I think the image you mentioned is at https://twitter.com/DanWarp/status/297023692490297344. The third person is not identified (obviously not @DanWarp as shown on ID card in front of him) so this picture does not identify him as an actor on the show. Twitter accounts should be verified to be used as a reference, a tweet by https://twitter.com/DanWarp, https://twitter.com/ArianaGrande, or https://twitter.com/jennettemccurdy would be best. There may be tweets somewhere in one of those three that gives other actor's names. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:43, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

This is the only link that might work https://twitter.com/ArianaGrande/status/300158148528988160. I have followed him for the past few weeks. He is in a few picks for sam and cat. Also has beentweeting about the show. I have looked at his facebook and everything Matches up. He even tweets about the next episode https://twitter.com/CameronOcasio/statuses/300842738335748096. He was been in picks for episode 102 and 103. As well mentions episode 104. I did message him on facebook to see if he would be willing to confirm his account, but has not been on since wednesday. On his facebook he mentions his role on sam and cat as well. Jennette and Ariana do follow him. Dan at this time does not. His facebook http://www.facebook.com/pages/Cameron-Ocasio/540862889265457?sk=infoWP Editor 2012 (talk) 15:59, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Good enough in my opinion to add to cast list using Grande tweet. I'm a bit wary of using any of his tweets as information as, even though he is followed by a verified account, his account is not yet verified. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:20, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

I removed the logo again as it was replaced from a fan-made version, not the official one that was there. If we are going to have a logo it needs to come from an official source, not a fan-site. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:59, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

That Logo that user is putting up is an old one confrimed by Dan about 4 months ago. He had it in the backgound of his twitter and then stwiched to the curreent one. The fan sites have not taken the new one yet. Also It is pretty Much the same, Just without the blue background.WP Editor 2012 (talk) 13:45, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Dan seems to want the background as part of the design or he wouldn't have added it - the picture of the cast ID cards confirms that. We should go with what Dan is now showing. It is probably a work in progress and may change yet again before the show is actually aired or more official marketing material is produced. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:15, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Verified twitter as a source

Some material, referenced by the twitter messages from the verified twitter accounts of some show principals, was removed solely because the info was from a twitter account. The accounts used were verified twitter accounts so there is no doubt that the twitter accounts belong to the the individuals named in the account. We have other reliable sources in the article that show these people are insiders of the show. They are providing information "written by people who are directly involved" and "offering an insider's view". Per policy at WP:PRIMARY these are primary reliable sources and can be used for "straightforward, descriptive statements of facts" which is how the sources are being used in this article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:33, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Tweets where the principal states "Filming starts tomorrow", "And that's a wrap! What an incredible experience, I can't wait for you guys to see it " and "Great day filming with @cameronocasio & @jennettemccurdy!" are purely factual and in no way can be reasonably considers "self-promotional". They are not saying "hey I have an acting job" as that fact is already established by reliable secondary sources in this article. They are giving purely insider factual information about the production of the show which is reasonable to have in this type of article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:57, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

they are not "purely factual". they are crap primary sources used to attempt to establish some type of notability for this project.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:05, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what you have against this show or article but you need to stop. Swearing will lead no where and it is "purely factual." Stop edit warring and take your opinions to this talk page if you must. Otherwise, stop edit warring.- Astros4477 (Talk) 22:14, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Notability has already been established by two reliable secondary sources giving significant coverage. The tweets are giving purely factual insider information and have nothing to do with establishing notability. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:19, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Are the use of twitter feeds from the people involved in the production appropriate use of primary sources for this article [1]?

• no - primary sources particularly the promotional and ephemeral twits from people so closely involved in the production should not be used in this manner in an attempt to bolster the apparent notability and coverage of the project. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:24, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

• yes - the primary sources are being used appropriately per WP:PRIMARY to provide uninterpreted factual information about the production of this show. They are not being used for any other purpose. The are not promoting the show, they are just describing what is happening based on their involvement in the shows production. One twitter message does provide factual information that supports that filming has commenced. This is purely factual info that that person would know and the veracity and identity of the person leaving the message is not in doubt. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:48, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Your position requires us to presume that the twits are coming from sources who have absolutely no reason for self promotion. As celebretaunts whose livelyhood is dependent upon fame and notice of the public, such a presumption is absurd. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:59, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Given the contents of the actual messages involved are not promotional in nature, just giving out insider info, it is reasonable to presume that they are not engaging in self-promotion in this specific case. Their general desire to promote themselves does not mean that everything they do is related to that. This is an article about a TV series, not the two principal actors, not the show runner. Info is solely related to information they would know based on their involvement in the TV series. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:13, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

i have some land in florida for sale. really i do. just hand over some money and its yours.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:17, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

• Having responded to the report on the 3RR noticeboard (and protected the article), I feel obliged to become engaged in the discussion. I have no prior knowledge of the subject matter, so I should qualify as a neutral observer.

I note that WP:TWITTER provides Wikipedia policy on the use of Twitter as a source. It lists five conditions -- and one pre-condition -- that must be met for Twitter to be acceptable. This discussion on the reliable sources noticeboard is also relevant. I see that this article also cites YouTube, which carries similar issues. IMO, the article meets the threshold criterion that it is not based primarily on these sources (because refs 1 and 6 cite reliable sources independent of the subject' Billboard also could be cited). Let's do a point-by-point evaluation of the other criteria to consider in evaluating these sources:

• The first question to ask about these sources (IMO) is about the pre-condition: whether the content obtained from these sources is information about the feed owners themselves (which may be acceptable). A few statements are sourced to the actresses' Twitter feeds and the official website of the produce (Dan Schneider); I think these would be acceptable if the information is about these people are topics within their direct control.
• The next key concern for both Twitter and YouTube as sources is the question of whether there is any reasonable doubt as to their authenticity (item 4 at WP:TWITTER). I gather from the discussion on this page that the actresses' Twitter feeds are deemed to be authentic, and I think we can consider Dan Schneider's official website to be authentic. Is there any dispute about the authenticity of the YouTube video source? I do have concern about citing http://ask.fm/arianagrandefromfriday2nextfriday/answer/23777185208 -- we can't verify that this tweet really came from Ariana, so we can't use it.
• Now, let's consider the first three items at WP:TWITTER, which relate to the content: Is the material neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim? Does it involve claims about third parties? Does it involve claims about events not directly related to the source? I contend that all of these Twitter feeds exist for a self-serving purpose, but that doesn't mean that every tweet is self-serving information. I don't see any of the article content that is sourced to a Twitter feed as self-serving. I do see a claim about a third party in using an actress' tweet to indicate that Cameron Ocasio is in the show (ref 7). I don't think we can use that information. As for whether the events are directly related to the sources, I think that all of the information sourced to tweets by the actresses and Schneider is OK.

On that basis, I judge the tweets by McCurdy and Grande to be potentially acceptable (refs 2 and 3), and I think that Dan Schneider's website is potentially acceptable (ref 5). I reject reference 4, however, as unauthenticated.

It's also important to look at the sources and see if they support the article content. I'm afraid I can't accept the cryptic statements in the two actresses blogs (refs 2 and 3) as adequate basis for stating that the pilot was filmed in September. That's probably true, but it looks like it takes a bit of original research to reach that conclusion. The reference to Dan Schneider's tweet (which should, BTW, point to http://www.danwarp.blogspot.com/2012/11/sam-cat-is-go.html ) is OK.

Bottom line: Refs 2, 3, 4, and 7 -- and the content that is sourced to them -- are not acceptable. Ref 5 looks OK (also refs 1 an 6). I've not thoroughly evaluated the YouTube video (ref 8). --Orlady (talk) 04:00, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

In my opion some of the tweets are fine to use. The tweet on Grande's twitter about Cameron, I was doubtful at first. By seeing that the show is now filing its fourth episode the tweet is becoming reality that he is a main cast member.as far as http://ask.fm/arianagrandefromfriday2nextfriday/answer/23777185208, I have never heard Grande mention it, but again I don't really foloow her like some fans. I have seen the site mentioned, but not seeing that it is her. Instead I would use one of Dan's tweets for the start of fiming date. Also Nick is going to be having the annal event(forget what it is called) in a couple of weeks. or next week. I think we should just leave it until we get more press releases from Nick. Otherwise there is no point in having this article if were taking out the tweets. WP Editor 2012 (talk) 20:36, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Please remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia based on information published by reliable sources. It isn't a fan site. It doesn't exist for publication of gossip. --Orlady (talk) 21:33, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the impartial evaluation of the sources. I would disagree a bit about a twitter message identifying a co-worker, even if it does mention a third party, except that there is an image posted by the show runner where this actor's name sign is blanked out so this may be something that an actress on the show is not authorized to reveal. The actress's other twitters seem to me pretty obviously supportive of the info added to the article, but if others' disagree I can accept that judgment. Overall, good job on researching and evaluating this issue and I have no problems accepting your conclusions. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:58, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I'll go edit the article to remove the items I found to be unsupported, and I'll unprotect the article.

Regarding the tweet about Cameron, the entire tweet is "Great day filming with @cameronocasio & @jennettemccurdy!" It doesn't state that they were filming this show -- perhaps they were filming a commercial or a YouTube video, for example. It requires some original synthesis to conclude that Cameron is going to be on this show. Furthermore, even if we accept that they were filming this show, one tweet hardly demonstrates that he's a "main character" -- or even a regular -- on the series. Wikipedia needs to wait for a published statement about his role in the show. --Orlady (talk) 19:17, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree it is not sufficient in of itself to support what was added. It, at most, supported that the twitter account mentioned was valid and possibly info in that account could potentially be used. However that is not important to this article and it would be better so see something more direct from the production team or the network identifying actors. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:29, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes it is fine if it is in compliant with WP:PRIMARY. Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 05:16, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 14 February 2013

want to add logo of show at this link:http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20121213073610/icarly/images/3/37/Sam_%26_Cat_logo.jpg

24.6.47.32 (talk) 03:55, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

 Not done: The image must first be uploaded. See Help:Introduction to uploading images for more information. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:43, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Temporary protection of this article

My apologies for not posting earlier to explain why this article is currently protected. I protected it because edit warring was occurring on the article. A user had posted at the 3RR noticeboard to report another user for edit warring. I decided that the best (that is, least destructive) way to stop the edit warring was to protect the article for a few days while discussion occurred on this page. This is the discussion labeled "Verified twitter as a source". --Orlady (talk) 14:35, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Page protection currently expires 22:45, 16 February 2013 (UTC). If users want to make edits before then, please post your requests on this page; an administrator will look at the request. Whether the page is protected or not, everyone should remember that fan sites and social media aren't generally considered reliable sources for an encyclopedia. --Orlady (talk) 14:40, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Okay, but what about official sources that use social media? In any case, the categories Category:2013 American television series debuts and Category:2010s Nickelodeon shows should be added once the protection expires. -------User:DanTD (talk) 17:10, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

"official" sources are primary sources that are close to the subject of the article. they can be used in a limited number of circumstances for non controversial, non promotional content about themselves. since this is a show that has not yet aired will depend upon an audience to attract commercial support, nearly anything that comes from them needs to be held to the utmost standards for being non-promotional as their profits depend upon the audience to support the commercials. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:24, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

I can't find that guidance about "official" sources. Is there a link so I can evaluate it in context? Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:25, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

That WP:TWITTER link describes Wikipedia policy regarding all self-published sources (not just Twitter), including "official" sources. If you search for "official sources" at WP:RSN, you probably will find a number of discussions that add clarity regarding that policy. --Orlady (talk) 19:22, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

I looked there and in the RSN archives before I posted. I couldn't find anything direct and I am trying to better understand the issues. I was looking for the WP article, essay, guideline or policy where the phrase "for non controversial, non promotional content about themselves" was stated. Mainly because that would imply info from press releases could never be used as supporting references and I don't think this is true. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:42, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

You are correct that press releases can be acceptable as sources, but we need to use judgement in how they are used. The words used in the relevant subsection of WP:V are "the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim". --Orlady (talk) 20:52, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Can we cite this site as a source

I wanted to start putting some information on this Wikipedia page and I found this new Sam and Cat web site. It is called Sam and Cat Online, and I was wondering if we could use it as a source. It is supposed to be a news site and I think it would be a great source for future edits of ours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slash1478 (talk • contribs) 21:39, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources: "Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. This means that we only publish the opinions of reliable authors." WP:Verifiability states: "Self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs (as distinguished from newsblogs, above), Internet forum postings, and tweets, are largely not acceptable as sources."

The website http://samandcatonline.tk/ identifies itself as an "Unofficial fansite". It's a wordpress blog with exactly two blog posts, dated 12 March and 13 March. The site has no indication of who owns or maintains it. There is no way that this qualifies as a reliable source for Wikipedia. Additionally, the content that you have added to the article doesn't say much of anything. It is just gossipy hype intended to excite the young audience for this upcoming TV show. I am removing your addition, once again.

If you don't trust me and want another opinion on that website, try posting on the reliable sources noticeboard. --Orlady (talk) 21:52, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

PS - I just posted a Welcome message on your talk page. You may not be familiar with the various policies and guidelines that get tossed around here; the welcome message contains some helpful links for you. --Orlady (talk) 21:58, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

GloZell - Any Actual Sources?

Although I love GloZell, does anyone have an actual source to use? A youtube video posted on April Fool's Day is far from a reliable source. And every other source linked simply copies what she says in the video. 99.162.156.148 (talk) 15:38, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree. Any reference dated April Fools' Day is extremely dubious just because of the date. Particularly when there is nothing else supporting it. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:42, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

As far as it being an april fools prank who knows, But there have been pics of her being on set. However, she shouldn't be listed in the main character section. If she is on she is only on once as far as I can tell.WP Editor 2012 (talk) 14:12, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

If in one episode, belongs as a mention in the episode summary of that episode. If in multiple episodes, should be added as a recurring character to this article as well. If shows up named in the opening credits, then should be added to the starring list and main cast list. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:59, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

iParty With Victorious

In iParty With Victorious, Sam and Cat met each other, and even both sang with each other, and by the start of Sam & Cat, Sam is a big celebrity, but when she runs into Cat, they dont know each other in person. Now on Cats behalf, how would she forget meeting a big celebrity, and on Sams behalf, she usually doesn't forget people. Does that mean that iParty is no longer canon? Should we put that on the page? --72.209.53.244 (talk) 15:42, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

No. It probably means you're taking things too seriously. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. We report what reliable sources have to say about a subject, not what the Secret Masters Of Fandom decide about the speculative meaning of possible continuity errors in TV shows. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:59, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

The basic premise of this show is that they haven't met before. Episode one would have been significantly different if they had. I am certain that Dan Schneider didn't forget "iParty" so it is just not a part of canon for S&C. I think we can ignore everything on the previous shows unless re-introduced on this show. As for this article mentioning that, I think it should go in only if some reliable source talks about it, otherwise I recommend we just ignore it. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:03, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) iParty with Victorious is either non-canon or there exist reasons why they don't know each other (e. g. Cat hasn't watched iCarly yet). As long as we don't have any source about it, we shouldn't include it in the article. --Morten Haan (talk) 16:04, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

In Dan's funfacts he stated that True, both characters appeared in iParty... but they never really interacted. So, to me, this is their first real meeting http://danwarp.blogspot.com/2013/06/sam-cat-tomorrow-night.htmlWP Editor 2012 (talk) 21:44, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh yeah, now that I think about it, they didn't really interact in iParty, and SummerPhD I know its an encyclopedia, I never said it wasn't. It was more just a general question, that no, I'm not taking too seriously. So don't go calling me names (especially stupid ones like "Secret Masters of Fandom"). --72.209.53.244 (talk) 19:38, 2 July 2013 (UTC)