Talk:Odd Squad

Television Start‑class

	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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Agent Names

Oscar mentioned in an episode that there was one Odd Squad agent who does not begin with O which all agents names begin with. Will he or she have his or her own episode. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheLegoCat (talk • contribs) 21:02, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it was Todd. He had his own episode. --Wyatt2049 (talk) 20:46, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is the list of the gadgets important?

I feel they're not really notable in the show's context, and the long list is undue weight. However, I didn't just jump directly to removing them because I've already done it once before and the list was re-added. Thoughts on their inclusion? - Purplewowies (talk) 11:01, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's trivia. My shortcut test for trivia: do independent reliable sources discuss it? No? It's trivia: great for a blog or fansite, not encyclopedic. - SummerPhD^v2.0 03:37, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That was my rationale removing it first time. *tentatively removes it again to see if the removal sticks if it's done again* - Purplewowies (talk) 06:02, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

...Okay, the same IP user has added it twice now. If my wiki time and energy weren't stretched so thin, I'd have a very clear idea of what to do next. *sigh* - Purplewowies (talk) 21:52, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Two people here is a WP:CONSENSUS, albeit a weak one. I've removed it again and asked the IP to join the discussion. - SummerPhD^v2.0 06:11, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's happened again, and I'm not sure removing it would prevent its re-addition (i.e. I don't want this to be a slow-moving edit war). I'd go to a dispute resolution avenue, but I'm pretty sure they all require the other party (the IP) to be responsive, which they're not. Would it be wrong to take this to WP:RPP or am I jumping the gun with that thought? - Purplewowies (talk) 15:09, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We're back here to discuss the issue. The discussion still shows a solid WP:CONSENSUS to not include the list. Until such time as there is some discussion saying it should be included, there is no way it will be included. - SummerPhD^v2.0 20:42, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Still no discussion to the contrary. I'm removing the list again. Further restorations will lead to warnings/page protection/blocks as required to get either discussion to establish a new consensus or compliance with the one we have. - SummerPhD^v2.0 02:05, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Math Room

Why is the Math Room listed in main characters. It hasn't appeared in that many episodes. I'd actually say Math Room is secondary, not a primary. TheLegoCat (talk) 18:52, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I think the article could benefit from a short plot section that might include a mention of Math Room (i.e. "Blah blah something about their starting of the investigation of the process and the way the math is integrated in. Blah blah blah often reach a point in their mission where they cannot find a solution. The agents occasionally visit a talking "Math Room" (T.J. McGibbon) where they can discuss what they know about their problem and visualize it on the Math Room's large, floating origami papers."). The cast lists are already fairly bloated with what I think are extraneous characters that might be more appropriate on Wikia or a fansite, but not necessarily here. I think Math Room is notable enough to include but would probably fit better in a plot section of some sort. (Of course, that would need to be written and sourced, which I could do... but not at this exact moment.) - Purplewowies (talk) 05:36, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Should this article be protected?

Anonymous users keep adding information that is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. I'm considering going to RFPP and asking for semiprotection, but I want to make sure there's no reason I shouldn't first. - Purplewowies (talk) 02:45, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree. I realize, yes, it's been 5 months since you posted this and all, but I think this article completely does not follow the encyclopedic tone of Wikipedia. I think it should be protected until someone steps in and fixes it. Cattyboi (talk) 12:55, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Source discrepancy

The currently cited source for US airdates (KET) lists three episodes near the end of the table as having premiered in October. (They didn't air in all PBS markets on those dates, but I can't determine whether or not they aired on KET. Anonymous editors keep repeatedly changing the dates to this week, and now that my guide has caught up, my local listings display those episodes as new this week, but I can't determine if the source should be replaced with a general source, if KET gets episodes earlier (and therefore technically is correct for premiere dates, or if there should be some other solution. - Purplewowies (talk) 02:20, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]