Talk:List of Thunderbirds episodes

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

• The result is a merge and redirect, based on no actual rebuttle to the proposed merger. Since this is a discussion, and not a vote, there needs to be more than simply "object". Josiah Rowe has provided links to books on Amazon that could provide enough information to separate some of these articles back out onto their own. I hope someone invests in those sources, or maybe even founds others that they don't have to pay for. But, as it currently stands the episodes fail multiple guidelines and showing sources available is like showing Google hits, and not a criteria for keeping.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

All of the episodes of this series fail the notability guidelines for television episodes. The way for these articles to be improved is through the inclusion of real-world information from reliable sources to assert notability. That is unlikely to happen, and these only contain overly long plot summaries, trivia, and quotes. Per that, they need to be a small part of this list. If there are no objections, these will be redirected soon. TTN 23:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I cannot argue with the conclusion that the episode articles are unlikely to be updated with reliable sources - a TV series that is forty years old rarely has enough web attention or associated reading from which to cite.

Nevertheless, I feel that User:TTN is behaving recklessly when he/she uses precisely the same wording when proposing that another TV series be merged - a blatantly copied-and-pasted block of text on each talk page with descriptions that do not always match the nature of the articles that is criticises. For example, how many of the Thunderbirds episode articles contain quotations, exactly? I also believe that it is rash to brand all the plot summaries "overly long" when there is quite some variation between the overviews for different episodes. If User:TTN thinks that individual episodes should be condensed onto a list page, he/she could at least submit a manually-written comment which highlights the negative points in each case without going into broad generalisation. Not to do so would suggest a certain unwillingness to study scenarios in detail before labelling them for a merger - which could potentially be unconstructive for Wikipedia.

If the Thunderbirds merger is effected, I would hope that some information from the episode infoboxes is transferred to the list page - surely writer and director credits are notable?

I do not wish to be uncivil and I would not want my remarks to be interpreted as inflammatory; I have respect for users who genuinely believe that they are working to improve Wikipedia. I just do not see how stock-labelling these episode articles as universally poor can be helpful. SuperMarioMan 23:15, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I would prefer the episode pages stayed as they are. Surely it's acceptable to have individual episode articles for a TV series, there are plenty of them on wikipedia. There would certainly be plenty of information lost in the process of merging the articles, especially if you don't want to break the rules about episode lists. In any event, the case for merging the articles should be discussed in Wikipedia:Television episodes/Review before any changes are made. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobfos (talk • contribs) 20:58, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

• Redirect It is impossible, upon fair review of the guideline at WP:EPISODE to conclude that these articles shouldnot be redirected, since they consistently fail to assert any out-of-universe notability. Tagging episodes that fail to attain consensus standards of notability is alwaysa worthwhile ambition and these should be redirected as a result of that oversight. Eusebeus 22:09, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

• • There is no deadline, Eusebeus. I agree that the episodes should show some out-of-universe notability, but a lot of editors of television articles aren't aware of that requirement, or have only recently become aware of it. I think the sources I found on amazon.co.uk (see below) might provide the needed real-world context for (at least some of) these episodes, if there's a Thunderbirds fan who has access to them. Give them some time to make the needed changes. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 02:46, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Redirect is not deletion, and there is no prejudice against recreating any article that satisfies the guideline. The sources you indicate below may not necessarily provide the OOU content required by the WP:EPISODE guideline - every episode has an audience rating, for example - but that does not necessarily mean it can be used to provide sufficient claims to individual notability. Moreover, keeping these articles tends to encourage the accumulation of information that is explicitly rejected as unencyclopedic by the policies and guidelines (eg trivia, detailed plot summaries). Redirection is thus a beneficial solution since it prevents such additions. Eusebeus 21:02, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Advice to interested editors

This is a boilerplate bit of advice to editors of television episode articles which have come under Wikipedia:Television episodes/Review.

There is fairly widespread consensus that not all television episodes are sufficiently notable to merit articles of their own in Wikipedia. In the interest of fairness, the Wikipedia:Television episodes/Review process has been established, to determine whether it's possible to establish out-of-universe importance and real-world context for television episode articles. For example, after uncontroversial discussion here, articles on individual episodes of The Simple Life were turned into redirects to List of The Simple Life episodes.

If you're interested in keeping episode articles, the key thing is to find reliable sources discussing individual episodes. Sources which may help establish notability for these episodes include reviews in newspapers, discussion in specialist magazines, and detailed episode guides. (Some of my fellow editors feel that episode guides aren't sufficiently independent of the subject to establish notability, but I disagree, especially for professionally published episode guides.) The key thing for improvement of these articles is to include some real-world content (ratings are a good start) and information beyond plot summaries and cast lists. If there are any books published about this series, see if the production or impact of individual episodes are discussed, and add that information to the episode articles. If someone used sources like these books on a handful of these episode articles, to indicate that the episodes of this series have received sufficient coverage in reliable sources that any episode of the series could have encyclopedic coverage, I'd support leaving the other articles as they are, because the potential would have been demonstrated. I hope that interested editors will take up this challenge, and improve the articles so that they won't be redirected.

In this particular case, I believe that there are reliable sources about Thunderbirds and other Gerry Anderson productions: for example, this, this and this may all have useful information which can be used to establish notability for the individual episodes. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 21:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.