Talk:According to Jim

message: Hey, I think you should think about splitting the List of According to Jim episodes section in the main article. Most TV shows have there own list of episode pages now, so why not this one? Thanks, Mrx9898 23:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spilt: List of According to Jim episodes into separate article. 

message: I know for a fact that I saw a TV interview (on a Extra/Access Hollywood type news show) with Courtney Thorne-Smith before the beginning of the 2006-2007 Season, sometime in December or January, in which she stated that it was the last season of production. She also commented on the uniqueness of this sitcom compared to others and how they have had a good run, doing better than they ever thought they would.
I don't remember specifically when or on what show I saw this interview take place, but I know I saw it and I do know that she confirmed that this season was the end.
The link stating that on May 15th, it was announced it would not be renewed is probably faulty information.
Anyone who can help out by finding a transcript of this interview or information regarding this final season, would be great.
--71.92.216.176 06:42, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Faulty Information 

message: can we put the german fansite in the article?
in the german wiki are a lot of english links too 85.179.200.109 10:51, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to german fansite

message: This has been tagged since December. A Trivia tag is there to encourage the incorporation of information into other parts of the article. This has not occurred since tagging in December, hence the deletion. Simply changing the section name and removing the tag is not the answer nor is it allowed! 
===Trivia===
*The 2006 episode "The Grumpy Guy" poked fun at the real-life feud that erupted between Belushi and his neighbor, actress Julie Newmar. Newmar even guest-starred in the episode.
*Dana is the first regular character to have a last name that has been revealed. Until her marriage to Ryan, she along with all other regular characters had not had their last name revealed.
*Jim's middle name is Orenthal, while Cheryl's name is Mabel.
*Much like his real life counterpart, Jim's character is noted as a fan of Blues music, as well as the Chicago Bulls, Chicago Bears, and the Chicago Cubs.
*When the show was originally canceled in 2007, it's replacements were Cavemen and Carpoolers. Ironically, they would be both canceled while "Jim" replaced them.
Please try to get this info somewhere in the article, but not in its own section! Good luck TINYMARK 19:17, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted Trivia section 

message: *The 2006 episode "The Grumpy Guy" poked fun at the real-life feud that erupted between Belushi and his neighbor, actress Julie Newmar. Newmar even guest-starred in the episode.
*Dana is the first regular character to have a last name that has been revealed. Until her marriage to Ryan, she along with all other regular characters had not had their last name revealed.
*Jim's middle name is Orenthal, while Cheryl's name is Mabel.
*Much like his real life counterpart, Jim's character is noted as a fan of Blues music, as well as the Chicago Bulls, Chicago Bears, and the Chicago Cubs.
*When the show was originally canceled in 2007, it's replacements were Cavemen and Carpoolers. Ironically, they would be both canceled while "Jim" replaced them.
Please try to get this info somewhere in the article, but not in its own section! Good luck TINYMARK 19:17, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia

message: On May 15, 2007, it was announced that According to Jim was not renewed for another season. ABC Entertainment President Stephen McPherson said, "We are talking to the studio to see if there’s something financially, a deal that would make sense for us.".2007 Cancelled Shows: ABC Cuts Some Beloved Series, TV Series Finale, May 15, 2007  On June 27, 2007 ABC renewed the show for a seventh season with 18 episodes.ABC Renews "According to Jim", TV Week, June 27, 2007ABC renews "According to Jim", Yahoo!, June 28, 2007 
According to Jim returned to ABC's schedule on Tuesday January 1, 2008 with two episodes at 9 PM and 9:30 PM.  After that, the series moved to its regular time slot at 8 PM. Despite the writer's strike, ABC announced that the show will produce all 18 episodes ordered for this season.Breaking News - 'Jim' to Finish Out Season for ABC | TheFutonCritic.com
On February 27, 2008, It was reported that ABC is close to renewing According to Jim for an eighth season.Ausiello on Heroes, "Bubble Show" Mystery, Lost and More! - Ask Ausiello | TVGuide.com On May 13 2008, ABC offically renewed the series for an eighth season.http://www.thefutoncritic.com/news.aspx?id=20080513abc01  —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Arachnid (talk • contribs) 08:11, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia 2

message: Where does the show take place????  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.106.105 (talk) 14:38, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location area? 

message: "Much like his real life counterpart, Jim's character is noted as a fan of blues music, as well as the Chicago Bears, Chicago Cubs, Chicago Bulls, and the Chicago Blackhawks. Jim & Cheryl, also raise five children – Ruby, Gracie, Kyle, Jonathan and Gordon."
Is it just me or is this part awkwardly worded? MrPenguin 2 (talk) 15:05, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awkward Wording 

message: It is noted that Jim's first and middle names are James Orenthal, while OJ Simpson's name is Orenthal James "O. J." Simpson. Perhaps this is a an intended reference.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.236.85.37 (talk) 22:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Connection to OJ Simpson 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on According to Jim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090122032124/http://tvseriesfinale.com:80/articles/according-to-jim-abc-sitcom-ending-after-eight-years-no-season-nine/ to http://tvseriesfinale.com/articles/according-to-jim-abc-sitcom-ending-after-eight-years-no-season-nine/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090107155346/http://abcmedianet.com:80/web/dnr/dispDNR.aspx?id=060507_05 to http://abcmedianet.com/web/dnr/dispDNR.aspx?id=060507_05
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:39, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on According to Jim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120505145530/http://abcmedianet.com/web/dnr/dispDNR.aspx?id=052306_07 to http://www.abcmedianet.com/Web/dnr/dispDNR.aspx?id=052306_07
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100413172935/http://www.abcmedianet.com:80/web/dnr/dispDNR.aspx?id=052808_06 to http://abcmedianet.com/web/dnr/dispDNR.aspx?id=052808_06
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100131044226/http://abcmedianet.com:80/web/dnr/dispDNR.aspx?id=051909_05 to http://abcmedianet.com/web/dnr/dispDNR.aspx?id=051909_05
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:39, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: TV series articles should generally follow the section order laid out in MOS:TV, unless there is an overwhelmingly compelling reason (and consensus) to do so – there is no such reason at this article, so MOS:TV should simply be followed. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[MOS:TV]] exists for a reason 

message: Note that there is no requirement that 'Awards and nominations' tables be organized by "award giver", and organizing these tables "by year" is perfectly acceptable and may in fact be preferable. While the latter is my preference as the format, I am not going to revert the recent change in format to the former in this article table in the spirit of not furthering conflict over the editing here. But I am noting that this change was made on the talk page, and indicating my preference for the former table format in case anyone else agrees or wishes to comment on the change. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:51, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The decision for the big table edit was based on the format of current/recent shows and films already turned into Featured Lists. As examples, the tables shown in List of awards and nominations received by Stranger Things and List of awards and nominations received by Game of Thrones already hold a high standard. List of accolades received by 12 Years a Slave (film) is an example of a film's featured list with the same format. Finding some sort of consistency (and using the better articles to help with that) should hold a bit stronger than subjective preferences. Besides, the added "Ref(s)" column should encourage sourcing so the citation templates can be removed eventually! Just my $0.02 for the day. CYAce01 (talk) 06:14, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have no problem with adding a 'Refs' column – I do that myself, and I fully approve of that... But this gets back to earlier points I have made about the WP:FL process distorting the editing process by "promoting" certain outcomes that are not universally agreed upon – there is nothing inherently "better" about organizing these tables by "award giver" over organizing "by year" (it's pretty much a personal preference either way) – I'd argue (pretty strongly) that smaller 'awards' tables with fewer listed awards should be organized preferentially "by year". It's only when you get something that has won(/nominated by) a lot of different awards from a lot of different award givers that it makes more sense to organize by "award giver": e.g. List of awards and nominations received by Jennifer Lawrence – though I'll note that even in this case, the tables are actually organized by year, it's just that the overall listing is first organized "by section, per awards giver". --IJBall (contribs • talk) 06:44, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awards and nominations table 

message: You seem to not understand my point – we order them in the table as to their order of appearance when they are first promoted to main cast. IOW, when they are promoted to front credits, as per WP:TVCAST (please read the whole paragraph starting with , including the "note"). As per the table table, that didn't happen for Rouse and Rayburn until season #5. How they are credited, or even when they first appear in season #4, when they were not main cast, has no bearing on this.
So, I will ask again – what is the credit ordering in episode #5.1, when both Rouse and Rayburn were actually promoted to the full main cast? --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:56, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand exactly what you're saying. And I actually read those paragraphs long BEFORE even starting the detailed research. But, according to S4 E9 ("Poking the Bear"), Conner is clearly shown in the opening credits, while Mitch is listed in the closing credits. Therefore, Conner was officially promoted to main cast first, hence his relocation in the table/list. I ask that you watch the opening AND closing credits for "Poking the Bear" (first episode with both Conner and Mitch). CYAce01 (talk) 04:14, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, if that's the case, the table needs to changed to indicate Rayburn was actually promoted to main cast in season #4. A "note" can be added to indicate that he was recurring previous to ep. #4.9, and became main cast in that episode. But if what you are saying is right, then the cast table is inaccurate right now. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:20, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:   Upon diving deeper by making a list of all of Mitch Rouse's episodic appearances and checking where his credits land, I've concluded that Mitch is credited in the closing credits as "guest star" only. Even though he's listed as guest, he does play a major role in Dana's storyline. Therefore, I believe he should still be shown in the table. The table bars/colors have been updated to showcase the findings. Footnotes have been added throughout. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CYAce01 (talk • contribs) 09:27, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks likely to be correct now. I just checked ep. #5.2 on YouTube, and Rouse was not credited with the main cast at the top of episode (while Rayburn was). I did not check a season #6 episode, but I assume it's the same crediting situation. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:36, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast ordering in the cast table