Talk:List of The Mighty Boosh episodes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Television Portal This article is part of WikiProject Television, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to television programs and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Assessment comments This article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

This article is part of WikiProject British TV shows, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to British TV shows on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project British TV shows, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Bobfos 01:29, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Contents 1 Images 2 Fair use rationale for Image:Booshlive.png 3 Episode notability 4 Special Guests 5 episode descriptions

[edit] Images

I'm pretty sure we'll have to remove the screen shots according to WP:FUP. I'm just warning everyone now. ...adam... ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:45, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, the identify specific scenese and/or characters, but they don't add significantly to our overall summary of the plot. ed g2s • talk 19:37, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't remove the images. You know the drill, get consensus first. - Peregrine Fisher 22:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

General quarters. Matthew 22:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry - missed this before I did it. Surely WP:FUC#8 says that they shouldn't be there? ...adam... ^{(talk • contributions)} 22:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC) (and what are general quarters?)

Without being un-civil: Ed likes to believe his definition of FUC#8 is gospel, the consensus of the Wikipedia community disagrees (e.g. Wikipedia:Fair use/Fair use images in lists, Wikipedia:Fair use criteria/Amendment 2 and Wikipedia talk:Fair use#Screenshots (2)). Matthew 22:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

This has been discussed a bunch at Wikipedia:Fair use/Fair use images in lists and Wikipedia talk:Fair use criteria/Amendment 2. They meet our current fair use requirements, and the only consensus we have so far is to not change the rules to prohibit illustrated lists like this. - Peregrine Fisher 22:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Fair use/Fair use images in lists, Wikipedia:Fair use criteria/Amendment 2 and Wikipedia talk:Fair use#Screenshots (2)

I'd agree that the images contribute significantly to the article and specifically illustrate relevant points. They are absolutely justified under fair use. --Minderbinder 14:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Booshlive.png

Image:Booshlive.png 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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Episode notability

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 have certain bad aspects (though all may not apply) like containing overly long or one sentence 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. Otherwise, discussion will take place here. Please remember that this is not a vote. If you like the information, that's fine and dandy, but your opinion doesn't really count towards anything. The only opinions that do count are ones that that lean towards the inclusion of real world information. TTN 21:11, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I believe they are notable and I don't see how these articals don't fit to guidelines i've checked notability guidelines for television episodes and it all seems to fit perfectly--Wiggstar69 11:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm with Wiggstar69, this is an award winning television series and each episode deserves an article. Jonesy702 23:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the couple of people above, the episode's deserve their own articles. DC 15:51, 12 November (UTC)

Tommorow mid-day I will revert this unless anything else has to be said on the matter, then we can consentrate on the new articals from Thursday.--Wiggstar69 18:07, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Please see WP:EPISODE and WP:N. These will be continuously redirected unless you follow EPISODE to meet N. TTN 18:48, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment::TNN is refering to the policy that in addition to plot tv episodes need details on critics response to the episodes, details on the production, and details on how the episode is important beyond the universe of the series that it takes place in (how does it impact the real world). Retelling the plot and listing characters is only one quarter of the material needed to keep an episode article, and that can be collected in the "list of episodes" or "list of characters/minor characters" articles. As an example, the pilot episode of Smallville was built up with enough material to make it a featured article. However, there was not enough material to build up any other episodes in that series to FA status so they were removed. Hewinsj 20:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I like this show a lot, but I have to agree with Hewinsj. The notability guidelines state that "a topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." The article for The Legend of Old Gregg, for example, cites no references and only externally links to the episode's page on Internet Movie Database. Clearly this episode does not meet notability criteria, YouTube popularity notwithstanding. Alhead 20:40, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

As far as I can see this is true the only episode which currently fits guidelines (as far as I can see) is Eels (The Mighty Boosh episode), due to its content outside the plot summery reffering to 'real world' topics, other episodes have rightfully been re-directed.--Wiggstar69 21:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Your thinking about this backwards. I looked at the real world references for that episode, and you don't want items from the real world that appear in the show. That's trivia. You need to show how that item's appearance in the show affected it in the real world. Did the Eruo appearing in the show have any impact on it's value? Did Pong's appearance in that episode create a resurgence in it's popularity? Did Boosh viewers turn to Crimewatch because of it's appearance in this episode? That sort of thing. Plus it would have to be properly cited with an independent source. What you have now is a plot synopses (which fits just as well in this list) and factoids that don't help to show how this episode is more important than any other. Hewinsj 03:50, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Again, Hweinsj is right. The notability criteria require outside coverage of the show, not references to real world objects/people/events/ideas made by the show. The fact that the episode features the video game Pong lacks any real notability, not to mention the fact that the only external source for that article was the show's official home page. If you want, write about the show's inclusion of Pong on the Pong article itself, as clearly that is an outside reference to Pong. Until these articles contain some information from outside sources (outside of the show itself, not just outside of Wikipedia), they have no place on Wikipedia other than as a list of episodes. Alhead 21:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

All of the 'other characters' don't have biographies, please fix this. DC 15:51, 12 November (UTC)

Have to agree 100% with TTN. It doesn't matter how much you like the series, or how notable the series is. if the episode doesn't have any external coverage then it shouldn't have a page to itself. The article Eels (The Mighty Boosh episode) doesn't contain a single external reference. There is no evidence that this episode has many any impact in the world other than filling gaps between adverts on TV. (And please note I'm not making any judgement on its notability, what I'm saying is that this article doesn't provide me with anything for me to make a judgement, and it should.) Frankly, there's no way it fulfils the notability guidelines for television episodes. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:55, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Also Party has been suggested to merge also. Whilst I am a fan of the show the Party article is nothing more than a glorified plot summary and fails the notability guidelines for television episodes as well.Agent452 (talk) 01:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

TTn is using a WP wide quideline to control this page. If you disagree you have to go to WP:N and be prepared to fight over it for a few months. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 11:29, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Simple fact is WP:N says that an article must be covered in "reliable sources that are independent of the subject". A quick (and superficial) google search I found no relevant sources that deal with anything other than plot or the songs featured (both of which are not enough to make a page notable.If you can find sources and improve the article so that it fits the criteria defined in WP:EPISODE it can then be brought back. At this point neither Eels nor Party met those guidelines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agent452 (talk • contribs) 13:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Special Guests

Special guests are mentioned for all series 3 episodes but none on series 1 and 2. Granted, there weren't many, but what there is should be included. I've added "Special guests: Razorlight (as themselves), Julian Baratt's father (as Chris de Burgh)" to the "The Priest and the Beast" description, which is crap but a start. --RaphaelBriand 00:32, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

• It was Noel Fieldings father who played Chris de Burgh DC 17:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] episode descriptions

can someone please put the brief descriptions of each episode back, why were they deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.175.243.85 (talk) 13:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Visit the articles for the individual series to see the synopsis for all the episodes. Daisy-berkowitz (talk) 13:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Do we need articles for individual seasons? All you've done is fork this article into 3, which adds an extra step to anyone attempting to get to this information. Hewinsj (talk) 20:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)