Talk:Haters Back Off

Television C‑class Low‑importance

	Television portal This article 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. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comedy C‑class Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cast section

Why do we need a table for the cast section? There is not enough cast members announced yet and we can simply put [Actor] as [Character], [Description]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.254.133 (talk) 16:44, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Overuse of quotation marks.

Why are they so many, many quotation marks in this article? They're are a ton in just the first 2 paragraphs. BeckiGreen (talk) 01:32, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Since we are quoting material directly from the sources, we need to use quotation marks to identify the direct quotes. Once we (and the critics) have seen the show, we may be able to describe the content more easily without directly quoting these sources. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:14, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You don't get it. The quotation marks are used incorrectly. And this-"Since we are quoting material directly from the sources, we need to use quotation marks to identify the direct quotes. Once we (and the critics) have seen the show, we may be able to describe the content more easily without directly quoting these sources.", has nothing to do with using quotation marks incorrectly. Also, who is "we"? Fans of the show? This article is already overloaded with info that is in the Miranda Sings article. I'm going to work on trimming it down a bit. 76.123.200.158 (talk) 01:46, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"We" refers to Wikipedia editors. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:31, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not the first scripted series by a YouTube personality

I'm removing this sentence from the article:

The show is "the first scripted series created by a YouTube personality."[refs]

It's sourced, but it's still incorrect. E.g., Insecure was both produced and broadcast before "Haters", and its star and Co-Creator Issa Rae also got her break on YouTube. --Baumi (talk) 10:41, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, in 2012 there was Fred: The Show, which would also fit the definition of "scripted series created by a YouTube personality". --Baumi (talk) 12:56, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, fair enough. Insecure was probably too new for some reviewers to pick up on. I added "one of". But see the last paragraph here, where it argues that Insecure is not really a series based on a YouTube character, but an adaptation of an already beta-tested web series. And see here what The Guardian says about Fred. -- Ssilvers (talk) 07:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO; "based on a YouTube character" is different from "created by a YouTube personality", though. The first concerns the characters and world of the show, while the second specifies the people responsible for the creation. If Netflix had asked Ballinger to produce something entirely unrelated to Miranda as a series, it would arguably still have been a scripted series created by a YouTube personality, however it would not have been based on her YouTube character. (The opposite, a Miranda series without Ballinger's involvement, is theoretically possible, but unlikely in practice for obvious reasons.) As for Fred: The Guardian article complains (rightfully so) about the quality of the Fred adaptations. That's beside the point, though. While I, personally, can't stand anything Fred Figglehorn for more than a few seconds, that doesn't change the fact that Lucas Cruikshank created a successful YouTube character and from that moved on to create several scripted films and a (short-lived) Nickelodeon TV series based on it, and he did all that a few years before either Insecure or Haters. Since, AFAIK, the original Fred videos were monologues, the format would also satisfy the criteria set up by the Variety article. BTW: I've edited the sentence slightly, does it seem okay to you now? --Baumi (talk) 11:04, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The show debuted as the 2nd most popular digital original series in the US.

In the article it reads- The show debuted as the 2nd most popular digital original series in the US.[61] I went to the link, and that's for October 14-20, 2016. The way this is written - (The show debuted as the 2nd most popular digital original series in the US.) Makes it sound like Haters Back Off as the 2nd most popular digital series, of all time, which it's not. It was the 2nd most popular digital series from October 14-20, 2016. 2601:483:100:CB54:1016:7E69:AFB8:2075 (talk) 23:01, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]