Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television/August 2016 updates/Parent, season, episode infobox

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Current text

Note: The text between the level two heading "Parent, season, and episode article structure" and level 3 heading "Infobox" has been included to discuss here along with the text under said level 3 "Infobox" heading.

Parent, season, and episode article structure

The structure of television articles, season/series articles, and episode articles are all relatively identical. The sections below will map out the basic structure for these articles. The basic order of these pages tends to follow: Lead, episode plot, production, and critical reception; with any other miscellaneous sections coming afterward. This is because Wikipedia uses plot information as context for understanding the real world information in the article. This is the same setup as followed on WikiProject Film articles, which have the same structure as television articles.

Infobox

Below are the three main infoboxes to use across the project, with the code for you to copy: {{Infobox television}} for parent articles; {{Infobox television season}} for season articles; and {{Infobox television episode}} for individual episode articles. If you have any questions or problems with these template, please consult each template's documentation or start a discussion at their corresponding talk pages. All parameters are not meant to be used on every article, as some are not relevant to many television articles.

In the event that there are too many entries for any individual field, for example for the starring parameter, it may be beneficial to link to a corresponding section of the article (in this case, the "Cast", "Characters", or "Cast and characters" section) instead.

*transcluded documentation code is included here for the three mentioned infoboxes above*

New, updated text

Parent, season, and episode article structure

The structure of television articles, season/series articles, and episode articles should generally follow the suggested formatting outlined below. The basic order of these pages tends to follow: Lead, plot, cast lists, production, broadcast and home media, and reception, with any other miscellaneous sections coming afterward. If a section consisting of an article-spanning table (ie the "Episodes" section with {{Episode table}}) is being pushed down by the infobox creating a large amount of whitespace, then that section can be moved further down in the article. However, if said section contains plot or episode summaries, it should ideally be as high up the page as possible, since Wikipedia uses plot information as context for understanding the real world information to follow in the article. This is the same setup used on WikiProject Film articles, which have a similar structure as television articles.

Infobox

Below are the three main infoboxes to use across the project, with the code for you to copy: {{Infobox television}} for parent articles; {{Infobox television season}} for season articles; and {{Infobox television episode}} for individual episode articles. If you have any questions or problems with these template, please consult each template's documentation or start a discussion at their corresponding talk pages. All parameters are not meant to be used on every article, as some are not relevant to many television articles.

If multiple entries are required for any individual field, for example for the starring parameter, {{Plainlist}} or {{Unbulleted list}} should be used, per MOS:PLIST, over <br />. Additionally, if any individual field becomes excessively long, again using the starring parameter as an example, it may be beneficial to link readers to a corresponding section of the article (in this case, the "Cast", "Characters", or "Cast and characters" section) instead.

Proposed changes

• Honestly, there's some wording here I don't like: I'd advise changing "The structure of television articles, season/series articles, and episode articles are all relatively identical." (currently this statement is factually untrue, as plenty of older TV articles don't follow this format, and I dislike guidelines that contain "must"-type statements...) to something more like "The structure of television articles, season/series articles, and episode articles should [generally?] follow the suggested formatting outlined below." This has the advantage of wording that encourages editors to reformat old TV series articles (e.g. in terms of section order) as per MOS:TV (which I've been doing a fair amount lately...), without being an implicit "must" statement from a guideline.
  Meanwhile, sentence #3 – "The basic order of these pages tends to follow: Lead, episode plot, production, and critical reception; with any other miscellaneous sections coming afterward." – should be reworded to be more general: "The basic order of these pages tends to follow: Lead, plot, production, and reception [information?]; with any other miscellaneous sections coming afterward." I'm also wondering if this section should specifically list "broadcast" and "[DVD] release" among the "miscellaneous sections coming afterward".
  In terms of the infobox section, I wonder if there should be some mention of using something like {{Plainlist}} for multiple entries in a parameter field (or should that come in a later section?...). Anyway, those are my initial thoughts on this part... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:09, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

• Proposed implementation:

Parent, season, and episode article structure

The structure of television articles, season/series articles, and episode articles should generally follow the suggested formatting outlined below. The basic order of these pages tends to follow: Lead, plot, cast lists, production, broadcast and home media, and reception, with any other miscellaneous sections coming afterward. If a section consisting of an article-spanning table (ie the "Episodes" section with {{Episode table}}) is being pushed down by the infobox creating a large amount of whitespace, then that section can be moved further down in the article. However, if said section contains plot or episode summaries, it should ideally be as high up the page as possible, since Wikipedia uses plot information as context for understanding the real world information to follow in the article. This is the same setup used on WikiProject Film articles, which have a similar structure as television articles.

Infobox

Below are the three main infoboxes to use across the project, with the code for you to copy: {{Infobox television}} for parent articles; {{Infobox television season}} for season articles; and {{Infobox television episode}} for individual episode articles. If you have any questions or problems with these template, please consult each template's documentation or start a discussion at their corresponding talk pages. All parameters are not meant to be used on every article, as some are not relevant to many television articles.

If multiple entries are required for any individual field, for example for the starring parameter, {{Plainlist}} or {{Unbulleted list}} should be used, per MOS:PLIST, over <br />. Additionally, if any individual field becomes excessively long, again using the starring parameter as an example, it may be beneficial to link readers to a corresponding section of the article (in this case, the "Cast", "Characters", or "Cast and characters" section) instead.

Previous discussions

• Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television/Archive 1#Infobox template confusion (NOTE: This issue, though from 6 years ago, has since been address with the fact that the template code is now transclusded from the respective documentation page. So any changes made to the infoboxes will now appear here).
• Multiple discussions regarding the creation of {{Infobox television}} and its contents, though no others regarding the text used at MOS:TV.

Discussion

• I'm just wondering what others might think about keeping the level 2 heading of "Parent, season, episode article structure". Should we continue to group these three formatting guidelines together in the subsequent subsections? If we do, we might need to format the subsequent sections better to clearly indicate, if applicable, what content applies to a parent article, what to a season and what to an episode. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:06, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

I think the section should just be called "Article structure", and we can go into a bit more detail if need be to clear everything up (and subsequent sections could be rearranged if needs be). As for what we are saying on the structure, I think we should say something more like "Lead, plot, cast, production, and critical reception; any miscellaneous sections can come at the end of the article. If the plot section consists of a table that is being pushed down by the infobox creating a large amount of whitespace, then the plot section can be moved down. However, it should ideally be as high up the page as possible, since Wikipedia only uses plot information as context for understanding the real world information to follow in the article." I have no issue with the Infobox section. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:41, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, that's a good point about leaving a contingency for articles with table "{{clear}}" issues – it would probably be good if something about that was in the guideline. I think that, together, yours and my suggestions may be a way to go here... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:11, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

• Favre1fan93 every time one of these new "section" discussions, I would advise posting a follow up reminder to WT:MOSTV, if not to WT:TV as well, to let people know a "new" discussion section has started. Just a thought, but it's easy for those of us who try to follow these discussions to "forget" about them, esp. if we don't have the main project page watchlisted (though maybe I should do the latter on my end...). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:16, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
• IJBall I like your proposed changes above, especially listing {{Plainlist}} somewhere in there, though that is in the template documentation so possibly not. And I'll definitely make reminder posts in the future regarding new discussions. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:08, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

I think some of the major things in the template documentation that people don't follow, like plainlists, could be worth mentioning here, just to try and reinforce them. - adamstom97 (talk) 10:02, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

• I think we can maybe implement both IJBall and Adamstom.97's suggestions. What do you guys think? I agree with the reword of the first prose sentence that IJ suggested to clarify that it should be a "general" format to follow, and I like the combo of IJ and Adam's ideas on listing the structure and how that could be fluid etc. Finally, adding the use of Plainlist in the infobox section is fine. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:38, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Yeah, personally, I think the use of something like {{Plainlist}} in infoboxes is worth including for informational and "best practice" purposes. So, support. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:57, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

I also agree. The biggest point from my suggestion is the note about episode tables being as high up the page as possible without interfering. That is something that was discussed a while ago, and I have been trying to implement around the place, so it will be good to have it in here. - adamstom97 (talk) 03:31, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Okay. I've written up new text based on what you both proposed. Let me know how you both like it. I'll also approach a few other editors to see if they want to add a last minute comment to this. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:34, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. nyuszika7h (talk) 05:47, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, that reads pretty well to me. Just a note that I still think the heading should be "Article structure" only. - adamstom97 (talk) 06:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

If the plot section consists of a table that is being pushed down by the infobox - Why would the "plot" section consist of a table? That's very problematic wording. The section housing an episode table is normally called "Episodes" in the main and season articles. In LoE pages, it's never an issue. I don't have an issue with moving the episode table down to eliminate whitespace, but we need to refer to headings in such a way that won't confuse editors, especially new ones, and some of the more active editors whoc lack common sense. --AussieLegend (✉) 08:10, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Aussie, it happens in the early life of articles when there isn't an LoE page and the episodes are housed in a table and there isn't a reason for a "Plot" section on the main page. Like here. There are better examples, but this was just a quick one.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:58, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Currently the case at Frequency, for an up-to-date example. Alex|The|Whovian^? 13:03, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

I believe Aussie's concern is with the specific use of the words "plot section", and I agree that that could be confusing. I'd recommend changing that to something like: "If a section consists of a table that is being pushed down by the infobox, then it is acceptable to move that section further down in the article to avoid this." I think something like this might be better. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:14, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that was exactly my point. I'm well aware of the problem with new articles. Even some older articles suffer the problem, but in all the section containing the episode table is called "Episodes", as it was in Arrow (TV series) and as it is in Frequency (TV series). --AussieLegend (✉) 14:38, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Good point AussieLegend. I've updated the wording to clarify the point you raised. You can all see the change of text in this diff, but what I changed is currently reflected in the "Proposed implementation". - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.