This page is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Thank you! Great work everyone! I like how this project is being taken seriously for the first time! :) FamicomJL (talk) 03:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
TVGS Main page
Okay, so the main page looks better than it did a couple of days ago, especially once I removed the inactive template...ha ha. Anyway, there's still clean up to be done, and if anyone would like to post suggestions of improvements to the main page, how to get things organize...speak up! --Son (talk) 17:48, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It could be fleshed out a bit more. Some sections that have only like one sentence could be expanded to multiple paragraphs. The Game Show infobox might be too confusing, I don't know if that should be done. A regular Television infobox does a good enough job, a game show version would pretty much be no different at all. I also think that we should try to recruit other people, now that this project is getting up and running. And try to flesh out the members who haven't been in the project for awhile. I like the idea of getting people to fully sign their name when they join. The scope could be expanded. The title section is useless, I think. Descendent projects will be GREAT later on... I can imagine The Price is Right being the one descendent project that'll be needed when we have more members. The hierachy section might not be needed. The goals needs major expansion. Same for Projects and Tasks. The Adopt a Article section looks fine, but we might not want to do that until we get more members, especially ones who know how to add sources and citations, since that's what Good Article and Featured Article reviewers are now pretty much looking for. The infoboxes section needs clean-up. Same for the categories section. Everything else looks fine. FamicomJL (talk) 20:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not familiar with how game show articles are currently organized, but one of the first things we should do here is set up a structure that is the same or similar to the current layout of articles under the scope of this project. As for editors that know how to add citations... I can't speak for most of the participants but I can assure you that Son, Scott5114, and myself (through our experience at WP:USRD) are accustomed to adding reliable citations to articles, so that won't be a problem. We (in my opinion) also need to clarify the scope a little more - are we including articles models on game shows (such as the one on former The Price Is Right model Janice Pennington) within our project? The scope given right now seems like it covers these articles (which is correct IMO), but I'm unsure, hence why I haven't tagged the articles on Barker's Beauties yet. --TMFLet's Go Mets - Stats 09:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to think that anything related to game shows is under the project banner, so go ahead and tag the articles on Barker's Beauties. I added the tag to The Paley Center for Media, and to game show hosts. And good to here people who can do citations are in this group besides me. This will make the article collaborations of the week MUCH easier to do. FamicomJL (talk) 21:23, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with that, I just hope it's not too overwhelming.
Additionally, as for creating the standard article, we should probably get to that right away. --Son (talk) 14:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have nominated the Garry Moore article to be a Good Article Candidate. Let's hope it gets passed! FamicomJL (talk) 21:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have created this icon for the Project Banner. It is currently saved as a jpeg image, because I was having trouble converting to an SVG file. I have a post on the Graphics Lab page to get assistance. What do you think?—Twigboy (talk) 04:56, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I made this one a week ago and forgot to post it here. It's an SVG with a DoND case, a Free Spin from WoF, a TPiR price tag, and a signalling device intended to represent Jeopardy!. Could probably use polish (shanding and such) by someone who's actually an artist.—Scott5114↗[EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 05:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The idea of combining effects from different shows seems pretty cool. I actually like both, but I'd use Scott's for the logo of the project, and find another use for Twigboy's. --Son (talk) 00:54, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I second that. Maybe we could use Scott's for the project banner and Twigboy's for the/a project userbox? --TMFLet's Go Mets - Stats 01:02, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I created templates using both images here. Let me know what you think. --Son (talk) 16:34, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I like Scott's best, personally. Twigboy's could be used for the group userbox.FamicomJL (talk) 05:19, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was on the page for Duel, and saw that Son has assessed it as "Current" class on the quality scale. I think that's a great idea. Maybe we should make it so that shows that are less than a few months old get that as their quality scale ranking, or something like that? What do you guys think? FamicomJL (talk) 05:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Current/Future is used as a stability indicator in other projects. If the article is more than stub, but is subject to wholesale revisions, then Current applies, because the assessment could change for better or for worse in a short span. I don't think that current should remain for very long. In the instance of Duel, it should likely be classed appropriately once the first round of episodes is complete.—Twigboy (talk) 15:47, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, the Current-class assessment. I chose that because I felt there was no better tag to use. I could tag it as Start-class, but given that only 2 episodes have aired, I thought that the tag didn't fit. My thought on the Current-class is that it would only apply to game shows that are in its first season. Beyond the first season, the article should be stable enough to get a standard Start-class, B-class, whatever rating.
As for the Future-class, I'm not sure there's much use for it in our project. It's better applied in films and video games that have long-term developments and periodic announcements. --Son (talk) 00:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't know that there was such a thing as "current-class" until I saw this. Now that I've seen it, my position is that it should only be used on articles that are too volatile/unstable to get a fair quality rating. Once it stables out, then replace it with a standard class assessment. --TMFLet's Go Mets - Stats 01:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify, I believe tagging Current-class for Duel (US game show) was appropriate, since the game itself has yet to run its course once from start to finish. Because it is not a complete article, and "stub" was clearly not appropriate, it could not receive a letter grade pending the completion of the article. If after the completion of one game cycle the article still needs work, then Start would apply. As for Future, it doesn't really differ from Current, as it's just a stability flag. For example, you could class Amnesia (game show) as future. Oh snap! Redlink? We've got some work to do :) —Twigboy (talk) 04:45, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've found that a number of projects use a Current-class. If you go to WP:TVGS/A, I added Current-class based off what the Comics project uses as their standard. I suppose a Future-class could be added. --Son (talk) 06:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Watch out, Betacommandbot's about
Just a friendly note to those of you working on this project to double-check screencaps placed on your favorite shows' articles. Articles missing a fair-use rationale can be tagged by Betacommandbot, and if a rationale isn't provided, they'll be deleted. Watch for the bot and fix the rationales should an image get tagged! —Scott5114↗[EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 08:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll definitely make sure to add rationales when the warnings come up. FamicomJL (talk) 22:17, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding Pyramid (game show), that article is currently a mess. Do you think that you could help by trimming some of the cruft (we don't need to know about the joke Winner's Circle on the last ep of $20K, funny as it was) and re-adding some info on how the game is actually played? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 04:54, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the article is a MAJOR trivia induced mess... but atleast it looks better than it did a few months ago. A lot of the cruft is gone, at least. I actually think adding references for the article might be your best bet right now. And Yeah, I really don't know why the guy prodded the gameplay article without asking us if we wanted to take any of the info and trim it for the main article. Best we can do is get someone who really knows the game well, and can sum it up in a few paragraphs or less. FamicomJL (talk) 16:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
