Talk:Television Without Pity

message: This needs a better history section. I came here specifically to find out when TWoP was first started. Though the article mentions major events in 2007 and 2008, it doesn't mention the beginning year. Doubledragons (talk) 06:13, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Better History

message: Hi I recently retooled this page with the far more comon ussage of the word, however I can't find any sources if anyone has any feel free to post them, thanks. Deathawk 00:02, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Retooled page  (previous post from [[Talk:Permanent hiatus]], which was merged here

message: Thought I'd put the inclusion/exclusion of the staff information up for discussion. I reinstated it but removed the internal links. I don't think the moderators necessarily need their own page, but I see no harm in including the info on the main page (and perhaps fleshing it out a little). --newsjunkie 07:50, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree completely. Orpheus 08:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't have a problem with the section.  It's not something that changes daily, though it does change often.  I don't think it's 'too' often though. Mild disagree? -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 15:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm just not sure it adds value.  I compare it to an encyclopedia entry about the Evening News.  Would you mention the current staff of the Evening News and update it with each release of the encyclopedia?  Probably not.  They'd just mention notable or longtime staffers.  So, maybe rather than having a table, the goal becomes to keep it up to date with staffers that have been with the site for a long time or who might be known outside of the site.  But, I still prefer removing the table altogether...I'm just offering up a compromise.  --TsuKata 04:21, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Staff Information 

message: While I have no problem with criticism of TWOP (the anti-TWOP external links are fine by me), I am beginning to get tired of the constant attempts by the TWoP Sucks partisans to add POV to TWOP-related articles.  The new Criticism section in particular rankles, as I have never heard these complaints about TWoP anywhere, and I expect it's only the TWoP Sucks people who hold this belief.  If there is evidence that this is in fact a popular criticism of the site outside of that group, that would be different; as is, it's not worthy of inclusion. Qaqaq 20:23, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
I never saw the old crticism section to which you refer, but there certainly is criticism toward TWoP.  You say that it's just the "TWoP Sucks" people. Well, this and other TWoP criticism sites are very active and draw thousands of former TWoP users.  I think it's possible to add a TWoP Criticism section to this article that is NPOV dwelling just on the facts.  It can, for example, state that some people have criticized TWoP for its board posting rules that requires posters to adhere to strict rules of usage, grammar and style. For example, people are not allowed to post in all lower case letters or to start a post with the word "um."  People have also criticized TWoP's moderators, accusing them of heavy handidly sanctioning (limiting user) users from the site for infractions of the rules.  Others have defended the moderators, claiming that the strict rules and enforcement keeps the content of the site on track, entertaining and easy to read.    There has also been criticism that the TWoP recappers, who also serve as moderators for the discussion forums, present a certain point of view on controversial shows, particularly with regard to reality television contestants and that posters who disagree with the moderator/recappers positions are more likely to be sanctioned or banned from the site.  Again, TWoP and other users respond that those who are sanctioned or banned are simply violating the rules or manners and respect that are spelled out for everyone.  I don't think a good article on TWoP can NOT include something like this and I think what I suggest is very NPOV. 71.195.181.150 13:41, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I've given it a whirl, trying to clean it up some. Did a pretty much wholesale rewrite. I left out the parts about repitious and self indulgant/agrandizing recaps, since I couldn't fathom how to NPOV that. -- Ipstenu 15:14, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That was a very good start, and I've removed the neutrality dispute warning.  I did some cleanup for spelling and grammar, and to remove some unnecessary phrasing (the recaps "produced by TWoP", for example).  In doing so, I did some rewording for balance; I hope the meaning is still approximately the same, but please change it again if you disagree.  Another question: should we move the whole section about the forums' strictness to the criticism section?  It feels like it might fit better there now. Qaqaq 23:59, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks.  I moved it; see what you think.  I had to reword a bit because there was some resultant redundancy after the move (and also because some POV had been added). Qaqaq 14:29, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism section 

message: "However excessive references to the particular recapper's personal life et al, said to be at the expense of humor and significant parts of the tv show, are known to repel readers and long-time members alike, as well as pet-names given to characters by the recappers. It is also said to be the cause of unnecessary length of the recaps."
Does this section seem strange to anyone else? Certainly, I'm sure some people feel this way but I would argue that many, such as myself, enjoy this... otherwise we'd just get summaries of episodes off of the official site!
And the "unnecessary length" part is stupid, and I will change it and less someone has a good reason not to, because that implies that there is a necessary length that a television recap should be, which is the most ridiculous statement anyone has ever made.
Daydream believer2 06:34, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not that ridiculous. There are some people who wouldn't mind reading a 15-page recap but not a 30-page recap. Stop with all the ad hominem attacks. Mike H. That's hot 17:59, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Daydream believer2 has a pretty valid point. TWoP is a site for people who want what it serves. It's not the only recap site, and it's not government subsidized or anything, so it has no responsibility to be all things to all people. It is stupid to complain about the products that TWoP offers for free because of personal tastes. Dave 20:05, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

text: It's called Wikipedia, so learn some civility. Mike H. That's hot 18:00, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been two months since the preceding comment was made, and it wasn't at all rude. I don't think there's a Wikipedia policy against taking inane offense, but maybe there should be. Dave 20:05, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  What the? 

message: The long detailed list of Glarkware merchandise seems to be bordering on both minutiae and commercialism.  Can it possibly be cut down signiciantly to include a description of what Glarkware is with just a few examples? Crunch 15:57, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've done so. No one responded after nearly two months. It's superfluous and borders on advertising. Crunch 09:42, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's ballooned again, and I agree that it feels like advertising.  As I said about the "conventions" section, I don't really see the point of it (who would come to the TWoP article to read a list of past Glarkware merchandise?).  I would trim it down to the introductory sentences, perhaps including an example or two there.  Thoughts? Qaqaq 15:41, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Why not move the list of shirts to the Glarkware page (there's a link, if not an actual page) and just keep "Every month, in conjunction with clothing vendor Glarkware, Television Without Pity prints a set of limited edition t-shirts with an obscure reference to one of the shows covered by their reviewers. To date, one of the most referenced series has been Alias, with four different related shirts produced." and then the end pg there. -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 16:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

text: 'Tis done!  — ArkansasTraveler 21:43, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Huge Glarkware List?

message: Besides the entry for TWoP shows on Permanent Hiatus being misspelled, it seems superfluous to have a separate page just to list shows that aren't featured on the site anymore.  I'd also go for deleting the PH entry altogether.  It's just as easy to find the list of shows on the TWoP website itself. lesmana 01:22, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dude, calm down. Mike H. That's hot 00:41, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge PH article?

message: I don't understand why people or one person keep removing legitimate  Neutral POV and referenced statements of TWoP criticism and the accompanying External Links and/or Refrences.  Wikipedia is not a fan site.  Nor, for that matter, is it TWoP itself, where a dictitorial single point of view rules.  Crunch 09:41, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to TWoP Criticism  

message: Someone should also describe the exact nature of TWoP's corporate relationship with Y! 12.46.6.69 20:40, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Corporate ties

message: I think the new criticism section is very, very careful and neutral. I tried my best to be fair when adding it, and the people who edited it after me made it clearer and even more non-confrontational. I see that the section's neutrality is in dispute, but I don't think it should be-- the criticism section walks on eggshells to just point out an alternative view of TWoP that a share of people hold. Hopefully it can stay.
:I've removed the non-neutrality warning for now; please see the above criticism section on this page for discussion.  I think it pretty fairly discusses the critical opinion now without seeming to espouse it. Qaqaq 00:01, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: It is not clear why this article insists on referring to the owners and editors of the site by their userIDs rather than their actual names (e.g., Wing Chun is Tara Ariano and Glark is her husband, David T. Cole, as is publicly known). – joeclark 04:58, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be useful information to add - go for it. Orpheus 06:24, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I have since added those names next to their userIDs. --Beeracuda 00:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Insistence on userIDs 

message: Hi.  I think it may be time to examine TWoP to see how it has changed since the Bravo take-over.  Despite assurances that nothing would change at the site, this has not been my experience there.  I considered myself a long-time time member and was in good standing (two complaints about my posting on the forums in five years isn't such a terrible record, is it?) but have been banned from the site since the new management installed its own moderators a couple weeks ago.  (So you might want to take my comments as sour grapes!)  It might be wiser to give it more time to see exactly how things settle down with Bravo running the show but it is the opinion of this former long-time user that any definition of what TWoP was before Bravo is no longer accurate.  Thanks!
:I agree, the new moderators (some old recappers and some not, with names like TWoP ________) need to be mentioned somehow. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 08:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time for a review or up-date? 

message: :Image:TWoP HomePage.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 06:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:TWoP HomePage.jpg

message: So how exactly is this site more notable then Survivor Sucks? CaravaggioFan (talk) 08:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: For one thing, Survivor Sucks was never bought over by a megacorporation. But what does it matter? Both sites have articles.--122.109.133.116 (talk) 07:17, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: TWoP versus Survivor Sucks

message: When I read that TWP is owned by NBC and that the web site criticizes the networks, I wonder if the site goes easy on NBC and its shows.  --Lance E Sloan (talk) 16:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  NBC and Impartiality? 

message: I know there's been previous discussion about the list of Glarkware appearing in this article, but I don't understand why Glarkware is a part of this article at all.  Their domain registration info is different; I get the relationship, but the sites are two separate and distinct entities.  Glarkware is just an advertiser.  Is there a citation anywhere that makes Glarkware a part of TWoP?  (By all appearances, TWoP itself doesn't print the merch, so at minimum there appears a factual error in that section - unless I'm wrong?) Townlake (talk) 19:54, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Relevance of Now or Never / Glarkware to TWoP

message: (re: March 21 2009 edits)  Does this have a cite, or some kind of corroboration? 192.31.106.35 (talk) 20:54, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Racism? 

message: I have rewritten the section about the 2008 staff changes and redesign.  Someone quickly did a revert on this.  I put my edits back in, trying to incorporate the suggestions made by the reverter. If people have comments or disagreements, please talk about them here. --Crunch (talk) 21:31, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  2008 Staff changes and redesign 

message: It's been nearly four years since we last discussed the idea of a Criticism section for this site. Given that 1) Several sentences addressing criticism were alreday buried in the central paragraph and 2) A Google search revealed hundreds of pages of content critical of TWoP, it seemed important enough for its own section, I added a separate Criticism section, hopefully as nPOV and referenced as possible. --Crunch (talk) 13:00, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism section 

message: Maintaining a list of recappers' screen names and the shows these anonymous writers review seems like TWOP's responsibility, not Wikipedia's. Do the writers get any coverage for their TWOP writing outside of TWOP? Townlake (talk) 05:41, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: List of recappers

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Television Without Pity. 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/20070315180847/http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com:80/misc/bravo.html to http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/misc/bravo.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070614082901/http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com:80/misc/tubeys_kids.html to http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/misc/tubeys_kids.html
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 04:57, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Television Without Pity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://twitter.com/TVWithoutPity/status/449213419712176128
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929103119/http://forums.televisionwithoutpity.com/index.php?showtopic=3155653&pid=8270364&st=0& to http://forums.televisionwithoutpity.com/index.php?showtopic=3155653&pid=8270364&st=0&#
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927142621/http://b4a.healthyinterest.net/news/000113.html to http://b4a.healthyinterest.net/news/000113.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927154718/http://forums.televisionwithoutpity.com/index.php?showtopic=3125164&st=0 to http://forums.televisionwithoutpity.com/index.php?showtopic=3125164&st=0
*Added  tag to http://forums.televisionwithoutpity.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=3129222&view=findpost&p=6862727
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110825085449/http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com:80/blogs/guest/the-hrg-files/ to http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/blogs/guest/the-hrg-files/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120212230122/http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/telefile/2008/03/announcement-from-the-founders.php to http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/telefile/2008/03/announcement-from-the-founders.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927060645/http://www.journalfen.net/community/twop_crit/ to http://www.journalfen.net/community/twop_crit/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120127090350/http://gawker.com:80/5003598/and-this-is-why-corporations-dont-buy-blogs to http://gawker.com/5003598/and-this-is-why-corporations-dont-buy-blogs
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090906143142/http://www.mediabistro.com:80/fishbowlLA/tangled_web/a_reader_responds_to_twopbravo_deal_freedom_of_snark_in_trouble_55093.asp to http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlLA/tangled_web/a_reader_responds_to_twopbravo_deal_freedom_of_snark_in_trouble_55093.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:54, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Television Without Pity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://twitter.com/TVWithoutPity/status/449213419712176128
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140408104619/http://forums.televisionwithoutpity.com/forum-529/announcement-92-twop-content-staying-online%3B-site-still-closing/ to http://forums.televisionwithoutpity.com/forum-529/announcement-92-twop-content-staying-online%3B-site-still-closing/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080115025123/http://stranahan.com/2007/11/17/television-without-pity-or-sense-or-me/ to http://stranahan.com/2007/11/17/television-without-pity-or-sense-or-me
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:36, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Can anyone access televisionwithoutpity?Halbared (talk) 18:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Website down?