Talk:Studio C

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Television 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Brigham Young University

	Studio C is part of WikiProject Brigham Young University, an attempt to write quality articles about Brigham Young University. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Brigham Young UniversityWikipedia:WikiProject Brigham Young UniversityTemplate:WikiProject Brigham Young UniversityBrigham Young University articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

YouTube Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject YouTube, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of YouTube and related topics 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.YouTubeWikipedia:WikiProject YouTubeTemplate:WikiProject YouTubeYouTube articles

Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject YouTube To-do:

A list of articles needing cleanup associated with this project is available. See also the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : see list.
Assess : Apply the assessment scale on Unknown-importance YouTube articles + Unassessed YouTube articles
Cleanup : See cleanup listing
Maintain : This WikiProject
Stubs : Category:Stub-Class YouTube articles
Other :
- Substitute {{WikiProject YouTube/Invite Members}} on user talk pages
- Check out edit requests on Talk:List of YouTubers

Season three over

Season three is over now, please add Season three episodes. 67.2.155.92 (talk) 02:43, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The previous Comment

I wish gentlemen and ladies would identify themselves, and speak their own minds. Some of the things that Studio C talks about should be worth thought and logical argument. Perhaps not here, and certainly not on the subject page. I, for one, would ask, is there really justification for putting a two-year-old TV program in its own page in an encyclopedia? I think not. Dsnow75 [[User Talk: Dsnow75|Talk]] (talk) 19:40, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you think this article is unjust, you can always tag it for deletion. But why wouldn't a TV series that's been on for two seasons be worthy of an article?

However, I do concede that the recurring characters and sketches section is overly long and is in need of references. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 02:14, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What is the need for references. I live in Utah, where Studio C is filmed (NO I CANNOT JUST WALK DOWN THE STREET AND ASK THEM ABOUT THE RECURRING SKETCHES). There is no need for references in this article and YES a show that has been on the air for two years should definitely be worth having an article. Thank you. 67.2.155.92 (talk) 02:27, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All articles need references. It's how we let readers validate any claims made in the articles. In a perfect world, every statement of fact in an article would have a verifiable reference to back it up. While this is not true for 99% of the articles, it's what we strive for. You can see Wikipedia:Citing sources and Help:Referencing for beginners for more information and guidance. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 14:42, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In particular, this article needs both permission from BYU TV and references, because the quotations amount to some four pages or more, and they are wrongly lifted, word for word, from BYU TV's website. Dsnow75 [[User Talk: Dsnow75|Talk]] (talk) 23:20, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Featured vs. Main

What is the difference between "featured" and "main" cast? "Featured" sounds more important, but all the "main" cast members are shown in the opening credits. What distinguishes the two? — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 21:58, 12 March 2014 (UTC)~[reply]

I leave it to you to figure that out. I would suppose that Whitney Meek, Mallory Everton, and Jason Gray are the stars of the show; Matt Meese is a star and one of the creators of the show. The rest don't have that title--they're not starring. But this is Trivial.Dsnow75 [[User Talk: Dsnow75|Talk]] (talk) 23:33, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Canceled?

I was looking at the summary for Season 4, episode #10 where it says "Studio C bids a fond farewell." Has the show been canceled? Or were they just bidding farewell for the season? If it's been canceled, that needs to be mentioned in the lead. I couldn't find any info on it being canceled online. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 13:19, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Season 5 is set to premiere in October. The show is still going on. 67.2.186.221 (talk) 18:28, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On the subject of References

~~Continued...~~ References are more flexible than you may think. For an encyclopedia, that has come to be characterized as a third-degree source, It is a question of helping readers obtain their information at its origin, which is not usually the writer of the encyclopedia. If it is, however, the reference may read "personal observation," "personal photograph," or "personal experience." If the subject is a person, "personal interview" may be all you need in a footnote. I assume you know what a footnote is. You have to do it, though. Somebody said that they can't walk down the street and ask the cast or director for this information. We can go down to the BYU broadcasting building. Just talk to a secretary. Or we can write a letter, and eventually someone who knows will write us back. I wrote a letter to Whitney Call once, and a secretary wrote me back. I got answers from both Miss Call, Miss Everton, and Mr. Gray on Facebook. This may take a while. When I wrote the studio, the secretary gave me all the circumstances and facts that I wanted to know. They might give you permission to quote them. But, as it is, we are passing whole pages off as the work of Wikipedia, when it is somebody among BYU TV's web developers, I would guess, that wrote most of these episode descriptions. Bigddan had a hand in the plagiarism, but who helped him? Dsnow75 [[User Talk: Dsnow75|Talk]] (talk) 23:27, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Planning to remove section

I was planning to remove the "Recurring characters and sketches" section. Although the description is accurate, but due to the lack of references, it won't be upto wiki standards. If I don't get references to that section within a week or a reply to this thread as to why it should be there, I will go ahead and remove it. Please let me know. Thanks D437 (talk) 20:10, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia articles for the stars of Studio C

I know this is trivial, but I think individual Wikipedia articles should be made for each cast member. Tom the Bergeron (talk) 23:46, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He who suggests, might bear the burden of starting pages. Bear in mind there is a bar of notability to be exceeded and nit-picking editors will put lightweights in the 'nominated for speedy deletion' if deemed insignificant. Examples of notable persons could be cited, like the character in Granite Flats playing Arthur who is a professional actor with many credits to his young career. -- AstroU (talk) 15:10, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Scott Sterling (fictional)

A character in a viral video produced by Studio C does not need a stand-alone article. --Animalparty! (talk) 03:58, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SCOTT STERLING DOES NOT NEED HIS OWN PAGE. That's all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.205.128.34 (talk) 02:41, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If, however, a character gains enough traction and independent media coverage, as it has in this case, it should qualify for an independent article. Learncontribute 04:05, 30 March 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Learncontribute (talk • contribs)

And it would be more fun if the "(fictional)" in the title was removed because it gives the punch line away in the heading. "Fictional" should be a foot note and more made up facts about Scott Sterling keeps with the theme of the fictional character. My grandchildren believed Scott was real until they read the Wiki. Then the fun was over.

Wikipedia presents facts, not fantasy, no matter if it spoils the fun (see WP:SPOILER), but if this article must remain separate, a more appropriate title would likely be "Scott Sterling (character)". But I contend there is so limited coverage of the character himself beyond basically "here's another funny video", and most of the sources describe Scott Sterling in context of Studio C (e.g. interviews with the real people who produced the videos), that the character can be adequately and succinctly covered within a single paragraph in the Studio C article. --Animalparty! (talk) 17:58, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's fine as is for what it's worth. I came here to figure out what the hell was going on with those videos, one of which has 40+ million views. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. {{U}}) while signing a reply, thx 01:30, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent suggestion. It seems a matter of order in Wikipedia, that Scott Sterling should get a section in either of several places (not an independent article). The Studio C article; the BYU Athletics article; BYU broadcasting, or BYUtv's article would all be good places for a character who has no lines at all. Besides, the Studio C ("Stu") article already needs severe editing. "Stu" doesn't need to extend Scott Sterling; it needs to rein him in; he belongs to "Stu." It is true that it has a funny feeling when Scott Sterling is allowed a Wikipedia article. Keeping "the legend" going can have a pleasant effect for those Wikipedia writers who are in the know, who can impose on their Serbo-Croatian-speakin', Hispanophone, or Portuguese-speakin' friends, or whoever likes the Scott Sterling sketch in particular. However, it takes unfair advantage of an informed public, that expects the truth to be brought together in this encyclopedia. Keep it simple, "Stu."Dsnow75 [[User Talk: Dsnow75|Talk]] (talk) 05:45, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Sterling ("SS") has received a lot of media attention so "SS" should have an independent article. My opinion. Especially since there are a lot of real life "Scott Sterling" situations. Mr. Nobody 312 (talk) 20:06, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Recurring Characters?

This article has Bad Karma as a recurring character even though she only has two sketches. Also, Should "Aww, Yeah" be included since she has two? Lobster bisque has five sketches and appears in one other sketchLittle Frog (talk) 17:26, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Episode

dose any want to make a list of Studio C episodes Fanoflionking 00:21, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's no need. There's already a List of Studio C episodes (this version) Dot.dot.dot (talk) 07:13, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]