Wikipedia talk:Television episodes/RFC Episode Notability

message: Hm... this strikes me as not such a good format for getting consensus on some view. Perhaps it would be better if someone were to propose a singular view, and let other people reword that (a la WP:BRD) until we get something acceptable. >Radiant< 00:05, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We had a singular view: WP:EPISODE, but if you will note WT:EPISODE there are way too many issues going on to even try to get the consensus on it.  Plus I'm pretty confident this is going to be a major split. --MASEM 00:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

text: This is far more organized than what we had before. Far less repeating, and more inviting to other editors. We do run the risk of people treating this as some kind of vote, and many statements make it hard to support one part of it, but not others. I would have rather discussed the format a bit more before hand, but given that we already had a flood of people coming to WT:EPISODE, I can understand the urgency (WT:EPISODE itself is/was around half a meg of text, getting a few hundred edits a day in the last week). -- Ned Scott 05:58, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

text: In my opinion, If you try the single view method, that will effectively allow the minority, be it 15%, 25%, 33%, to be shouted down with the majority, no matter what the margin declaring "consensus". --Cube lurker (talk) 06:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Singular view through editing

message: Should we just make this a general RfC about WP:EPISODE? Seems to be going pretty good so far, and it might be good to just start directing people directly to this page. We could clean up the top area (moving some of it to the talk page) with a brief summary of the discussion, noting the other areas of discussion to take into consideration. Thoughts? -- Ned Scott 09:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just been through the statements to date, endorsing those I feel are making solid points. I believe the specific issue of episode notability is the core question that needs addressing. Nail that down, and lots will follow. The thing that is missing from this RfC process is a final adjudication; different users can look at it after a while and derive different conclusions. Given that it looks like the ArbCom is going to accept the current request, they may make some, ah, authoritative comment on this RfC. It certainly will be considered. --Jack Merridew 10:20, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just make this a general RfC about WP:EPISODE? 

message: The last time discussions took place about this topic, it was declared that there had not been enough community input. Where has this discussion been announced? Can we annouce it in more places also? I would hate for all this discussion to mean nothing because people  shoot it down later on by saying "there was not enough community input and therefore no proper consensus". Seraphim Whipp 13:05, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I feel the same too, we do not have sufficient input from the community here. In the end people would dismiss whatever is the result of this RFC on grounds that it does not reflect the views of many editors. There are certainly a few places that we may announce this RFC, but anyone thinks a notice should be placed on the watchlist, best place for any announcement so it seems? - PeaceNT (talk) 13:34, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am seeing what can be done for wider announcement as well as to whom would be the best evaluator of the results. --MASEM 14:27, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If anyone's interested, please give your opinion at Template_talk:Watchlist-notice#RFC_on_television_episodes - a discussion concerning a notice of this RFC on the watchlist.- PeaceNT (talk) 15:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It might not be as wide as a watchlist notice, but we can turn WikiProject banners into notices. For example, I've used Template:WikiProject DIGI for such notices, and am currently using one now. -- Ned Scott 04:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It has already been announced in seemingly every TV-related discussion page. / edg ☺ ☭ 04:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Maniwar's link is to part of the WT:EPISODE portion of the discussion. Even with the RfC transcluded on that page, it's easy to miss for someone who takes a glance and says tl;dr. Maybe we should just place a notice on the top of WT:EPISODE. -- Ned Scott 04:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Can we announce this in even more places?

message: Is there a way to get a temporary injunction against the nominating in mass of television episodes for WP:AfD pending the outcome of this RfC? There seems to be some WP:POINTy stuff here and I feel it would be best for both sides of the issue if we stopped nominating episodes until this is resolved. Redfarmer (talk) 23:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't favor a blanket stop. I have been de-junking my own fandom in the past few weeks and found some unmergable pages that really shouldn't exist. Also, the majority of AfDs of the last few days have not been pointy, and if the AfD you mentioned above was not made in good faith (as I said, I don't know the show and can just judge the articles in their current state), enough people will jump to prevent the deletion anyway. – sgeureka t•c 02:21, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Not sure if we can force anyone to stop, but those who notice such AfDs should leave a note about the discussions here, so that closing admins will know what's going on. -- Ned Scott 07:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Temporary injunction against nomination of episode articles for [[WP:AfD]]?