Talk:Series finale

message: Did the 1990 Series Finales page get VFD'd? It's blank all of a sudden. Joylock 06:26, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Did the 1990 Finales get VFD'd?

message: It resolved what was probably the longest-running plotline on the show, Fry's feelings for Leela. -- Antaeus Feldspar 17:50, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is Futurama listed without a series finale? 

message: Over the past month or so, I've noticed the addition of a few foreign-country series that had series finales. While this is fine (since Wiki articles are supposed to be written from a worldwide POV), I would propose placing all non-U.S. series in a separate section; I'm presuming these all to be British series, anyway. Whatayathink? [[Briguy52748 17:12, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Differentiating US series from other countries

message: I am not sure what the criteria here are for "notable shows without finales."  Apparently all a show needs is a couple of fans to assert its nobility on this page and it gets listed (Joan of Arcadia?  My Wife and Kids?)
Okay, well, thanks to some inexplicable editing, there are now only THREE shows in history that have had notable finales, and one of them is Knight-Rider.  What happened??  I agree that not every show in history should be listed here, but the current list of three is absolutely preposterous.  If only three shows are allowed to be listed, they should certainly be something other than the completely unacceptable choices (excluding M*A*S*H; that was a big deal) that are there now. Chalkieperfect 00:51, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-notable finales 

message: Anyone else think these, too, should be given their own page(s)?Caswin 00:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-finale shows placement 

message: Unless there are objections, I am going to remove the Friends/Joey reference from this line: "sometimes a character or two may be set up for a sequel series (i.e., Cheers begetting Frasier; or Friends begetting Joey)" because as I recall, the Friends finale did not set up Joey. Friends ended with the character Joey planning to stay in the apartment in New York City. Then Joey began, and he had basically changed his mind and decided to move to Los Angeles. --Mathew5000 00:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  --Mathew5000 02:05, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Friends series finale 

message: Should the section in this article "Notable shows that ended without a series finale" be moved to a new page, it's getting a tad long for a single heading, more-so for just a simple list. I vote for a new page like the other sections for this content to be moved to
:Seconded!  It's crazy. Caswin 01:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that it's much too long, but on the other hand, is there really any use for an article on "TV shows that didn't have a series finale"?  That seems awfully silly to me.  At any rate, that section is a total mess.  Way too many entries, many of them very poorly written, and the majority of them having no significance whatsoever (I do not happen to agree that Darkwing Duck is "one of the most notable shows" of any type). Chalkieperfect 01:00, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable shows that ended without a series finale -> New page? 

message: Buffy finale, fancruft. Ditto Knight Rider. Must we put up with this?
See Why doesn't TV know when (or how) to BOW OUT? for discussion of notable finales, esp. Newhart's "most unexpected moment in TV."
--Ling.Nut 19:44, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Knight Rider is not notable. Buffy is, somewhat. Newhart and St. Elsewhere definitely need to be included. JAF1970 16:55, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  get rid of non-notable "buffy" and "knight rider" finales (fan cruft); add "Newhart" and "St. Elsewhere" 

message: Oops. Forgot about Quantum Leap. JAF1970 20:23, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Quantum Leap

message: Completely forgot "The Prisoner" too :p JAF1970 07:13, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Prisoner

message: How in the world is a spoiler tag needed on a section that makes it clear that the finales of various shows are being discussed? Our readers are not so stupid that they cannot realize that reading about finales is going to give away the endings... — Carl (CBM · talk) 05:12, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  spoiler tag not needed 

message: That show isn't particularly historic, and its finale isn't exactly special. JAF1970 04:13, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The King of Queens?

message: Roseanne did have a memorable finale (everything was a dream after Dan's heart attack). JAF1970 23:57, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Roseanne

message: I have removed an unsourced statement regarding one of the co-stars in Home Improvement being written out of the finale, and speculative reasons as to why. My rationale is WP:BLP. Feel free to restore the information if a valid source can be provided. 23skidoo (talk) 16:40, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Home Improvement

message: :Image:Allgoodthingsfinale.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) 04:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Allgoodthingsfinale.jpg

message: What about the Happy Days finale? 76.126.29.36 (talk) 03:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, what finale? JAF1970 (talk) 04:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Happy Days

message: I think the reason why animated series finalies are unimporant.Beause in America only cartoons for children hide their agenda of their last episodes to prevent the kids from knowing hat theuir shows ended.(including disney channe lstars shows).And second of all Only japanese shows show like that  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.83.40.224 (talk) 17:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  About Animated Series finale 

message: I've been bold and removed an incredibly long list of programs that did not have finales in the accepted sense (their last episodes contained no resolution).  These were labelled de facto finales, which I think was a misnomer.  They were last episodes or last broadcast episodes, but not finales. --Jenny 21:46, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Second thoughts, I've self-reverted and invite comments. --Jenny 21:49, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: De facto finales

message: Would this programme be considered for the Notable Series Finale section? The final episode featured an evil property developer buying up the land the town of Walnut Grove was built on... so they have to move on... but to avoid him getting all their hard work for free they dynamite the entire town and march off singing Onward Christian Soldiers. Not sure if the series itself counts as notable, though. Anyone? I'll write it up if there's general approval.Dantheman123 (talk) 08:33, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Little House on the Prairie 

message: The image :File:Goodnightseattle.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --20:46, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with File:Goodnightseattle.jpg

message: Fact is, most popular entertainment has come from English speaking countries. Name a single TV show finale from, say, South Africa or India that has made worldwide press? JAF1970 (talk) 06:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't say anything for South Africa or India, but I'll guarantee there are several such finales among Japanese anime series (which raises the related question of why this list seemingly insists on focusing on live-action television series). I can't think of any offhand (working through a three-day-long watchlist with over 1000 items has completely fried my brain), but asking at WT:ANIME will probably get you somewhere. 「ダイノガイ千？！」(Dinoguy1000) 06:33, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  You may notice the page doesn't go into detail about animation, let alone anime. Name a live-action Japanese series that's received worldwide press. Oh, and anime? It doesn't receive mainstream worldwide press at all. Wikipedia is skewed towards the computer geek, always has been, but honestly, mainstream press doesn't care about anime. JAF1970 (talk) 17:56, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh, whatever. I'm really not going to argue this, it's not my cup of tea anyways. 「ダイノガイ千？！」(Dinoguy1000) 21:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Global?

message: Are the finales of "Friends" or "Seinfeld" or "Frasier" really all that notable? They're pretty typical, mundane finales. They don't break any ground, they don't get "creative" in any way -- these are just popular shows that ended with something.
(Commando303 (talk))  —Preceding undated comment added 01:49, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can supply notability, you really should. If something is notable because of ratings or critical review, please cite it in the main article. Alastairward (talk) 18:01, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  You're joking, right? Take any TV Guide "BEst Finales" list and the ones posted were listed. Do you actually know ANYTHING about television? There's even citations on many of them. For example, more people watched the Cheers finale (80+M) than MASH. Seinfeld had a total audience of about 76.3 million people. That's not notable? JAF1970 (talk) 00:15, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Adding citations proving notability. Please refrain from deleting content til I'm finished. JAF1970 (talk) 00:40, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Added a ton of citations from news articles and "best of" lists. I can do more, but not now. Am tired. JAF1970 (talk) 01:28, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

text: I'm not joking and no, you do not own this article. I should point out that articles should not be a simple list of indiscriminate information and that cites should be from reliable sources. Alastairward (talk) 07:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why do I "own" the article because I put a ton of cits on the shows to prove they're notable? JAF1970 (talk) 14:27, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Your demand that we not edit the article because you aren't finished with it. Your edits do not address the tags at the top, that it doesn't represent a world view and nor does it address the fact that the episode is creeping into a list of indiscriminate information. I'll edit it myself later when I have more time. Alastairward (talk) 14:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

text: No, I'm not finished adding citations. And you're cutting valid lists, too. You wanted notability - and I defy you to prove, say, the ending of The Prisoner is not notable. You've already shown you don't know notable finales at all (you didn't think Frasier, Friends, etc were notable.) You have to have SOME level of expertise in the genres of articles to edit them, and you've shown none. JAF1970 (talk) 05:52, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Be civil please. No expertise is necessary, all we need are cites. Many of those that you've provided are not from reliable sources. Also, if we use the cites that you've provided in the way that you're using them, we're just going to have a long list of episode outlines, which isn't useful to the reader. A thorough rewrite is definitely pending. Alastairward (talk) 08:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm being civil, but if you don't know that Clarabelle speaking was a touchstone in television history (especially with what a major children's show Howdy Doody was)... JAF1970 (talk) 05:10, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

text: Being uncivil includes attributing reasons for removal of material that the removing editors did not quote. Never did I say anything about not liking the material added. Alastairward (talk) 10:04, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Really "Notable"? 

message: For anyone interested in improving the article, addressing the tags in place, making it more readable for readers, why not do so here. Alastairward (talk) 19:58, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: [WP:BRD]], you were bold and edited, I reverted the edits, I invite you (again) to discuss the above. Please discuss the additions that I have removed, with reference to wikipedia policies. As it stands, I am perfectly entitled to remove much of the content of the article. Alastairward (talk) 10:35, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article improvement 

message: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. At present a lot of the article is composed of a long list of links and episode synopses. Little of this addresses the subject material and it reads poorly. I would suggest breaking it up into prose and taking more from the cites. 
Alastairward (talk) 19:58, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of examples

message: From Wikipedia:Reliable sources; "Reliable sources are credible published materials with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand." and "Sources should directly support the information as it is presented in an article and should be appropriate to the claims made".
For example, the following have been used to support notability but do not appear to do so;
*The Houston Pilgrim; No assertion of this being a reliable source or notability of this finale.
*tvseriesfinale.com; No assertion of reliable publication process, no assertion of notability of shows listed.
*New York Daily News; Reliable certainly, but makes no assertion of the finale's notability other than calling it "outrageous".
*The Knight Shift; A personal blog, which generally isn't deemed a reliable source. 
Alastairward (talk) 19:58, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: [WP:BRD]], you were bold and edited, I reverted the edits, I invite you (again) to discuss the above. Please discuss the additions that I have removed, with reference to wikipedia policies. As it stands, I am perfectly entitled to remove much of the content of the article. Alastairward (talk) 10:35, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Cites

message: The Ropers (1979-80) was a spinoff of Three's Company (1977-84), but it did not spring from the series finale. Assignment: Earth was a backdoor pilot that was presented as the last episode of the second season of Star Trek. That episode wasn't the series finale, although Star Trek's prospect for a third season may not have been known when the episode was produced. Andy Griffith to Mayberry R.F.D. fits the bill, Star Trek, possibly with a qualification, but the Ropers doesn't. It appears that the the proposed Carmine spinoff from Laverne & Shirley is an appropriate example. Just1thing (talk) 23:05, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Finales launching spinoffs

message: WE need an article which is about the series finales of youth oriented shows unlike Adult and mature oriented shows,We need  to understan its difference therefore Iam putting the Animated series finale section back until you find out about its difference.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alfred123123 (talk • contribs) 13:34, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: We need cites above all else. Provide them and the material can certainly stay. Alastairward (talk) 15:20, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I said that we needcites first. All material you add must be verifiable by a reliable third party source. Please provide such sources and the material can stay. What evidence, besides what you wrote, is there to suggest that animated series deserve to be treated to their own section? Alastairward (talk) 18:11, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: About animated and series finales for youth oriented shows

message: Shouldn't this page have a brief synopsis of the series finale for shows that indeed had a finale?  That is what I came to this page looking for.  If that info is located elsewhere, then shouldn't there be a link on this page to that other page?  Does anyone know?  Thanks.   (64.252.124.238 (talk) 15:32, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There are external links for that sort of stuff, Wikipedia isn't a simple indescriminate list of information. Alastairward (talk) 10:35, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synopsis of finales 

message: Sorry to say, this article was simply not at all to WP standards. Most of it was original research, completely non-objective discussion or conclusions with no citations at all. Encyclopedic articles can't be fan-like essays on the subject, which this was. Extensive lists, and individual opinions and conclusions on the subject, and extensive detail which is not relevant to the article, all needed to go. The article is much more encyclopedic now. Additions should be verifiable, and extensive discussions of individual show's finales should go on those shows' article pages, not here.Njsustain (talk) 10:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit for Encyclopedic content and WP standards 

message: All right, I know I may be in the minority but I don't think the Lost series finale The End is all that notable.  The ratings were just average, it didn't break any records.  Plus the entry seems to be based just on Emmy nominations.  The End was nominated for seven awards--Outstanding Guest Actress in a Drama Series, Outstanding Direction for a Drama Series, Outstanding Writing for a Drama Series plus Creative Arts Emmys for Art Direction, Camera Editing, Sound Editing, Sound Mixing and Music Composition.  With the exception of the guest actress award, these are all awards the series has been nominated for before--how is that notable?  Awards aside, the Lost series finale did just what a series finale is supposed to do.  It ended the series.  It wasn't the highest rated finale ever (M*A*S*H), it wasn't controversial (The Prisoner) or unique (Newhart, St. Elsewhere).  So instead of getting into an edit war, I'd rather just come to a consensus on this.  Bhall87Four Scoreand Seven 18:33, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Lost'' Series Finale 

message: I know Canada and Australia use the term the same way as the US, which other countries other than the UK use it their way? Since there's no cite and a citation needed tag, this needs to be clarified and corrected.07:15, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "many commonwealth countries"? Isn't it just the UK? 

message: With all due respect to "The Fugitive," the first was "Howdy Doody" and the second was "Leave It To Beaver." Or if they weren't, what came before them? Specifically, when "Howdy Doody" did its final 60-minute send-off, was it inventing something or following the lead of some other show? 71.162.113.226 (talk) 01:18, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Howdy and the Beaver