Talk:Obi-Wan Kenobi (miniseries)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

“The Patterson Cut”[edit]

A section was added about this fan-edit which is just out of scope for this page, in my opinion. It is unlikely to be “notable” beyond this week. I reverted the edit because I think it should be discussed before adding fan-made content on this page. Louie Mantia (talk) 17:52, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While the paragraph was about fan activity, the story was covered by Variety [1], Entertainment Weekly [2], and IndieWire [3]. Perhaps a sentence or two could be added to the existing "Critical response" subsection. —ADavidB 18:20, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It’d be one thing to include an excerpt from a notable critic or a notable filmmaker. This person is neither. These three publications merely noted that the fan-edit exists in line with other articles written about similarly “viral social media” posts. I’m not sure that this itself qualifies it to be on the page, elevating this person’s opinion just because they made a fan-edit. Considerable character count on these articles are just quotes from the fan. There’s not really a “story” being written on any of them. Louie Mantia (talk) 18:38, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This seems trivial to me even though there's some coverage. Nemov (talk) 19:33, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that this is trivial, those articles covering it because it has come up on social media does not make it more noteworthy. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:58, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Reviving this thread considering there is now a Wikipedia article about it, The Patterson Cut, should we integrate it into the article or should it still be ignored due to the aforementioned rationale? Dcdiehardfan (talk) 23:32, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for raising this, I think we are going to need a wider discussion about it. I'm not sure that article should exist and I'm also still not sure we should be mentioning it here either. It still feels like a trivial thing, albeit something that will probably happen more and more in this world of social media. The fact that there are some decent sources discussing it suggests that it may be worth including it somewhere, but the new article as it stands has a bunch of WP:NPOV concerns. I think I'm leaning towards getting that article redirected here and having a short summary of it in the reception section (i.e. to address some fan concerns this guy did a shorter edit that received some attention from critics...). Interested to hear what other people's thoughts on this are. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:41, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am also of the opinion that this is a trivial thing and frankly am not even sure why there is an article created about it to be quite honest. It seems it was created by a third-party editor named JamesTheLaptop (did not want to ping him so as to disturb him). I was wondering if maybe we should contact the editor and see the rationale for the creation of the article, and maybe if we could discuss this with him. He said in his edit summary [4] when moving it to mainspace that he decided to self-publish it, and I feel like drama might unfold if we ask him to delete it, so I think we need to have a discussion with him about this. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 02:12, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reprising or new actors[edit]

I can understand that an actor reprising his role is relevant to this article at least a little bit, but I don't think that it needs to be noted who played the same role in other Star Wars installments when it is not the same actor. So I think that e.g. this edit from today should be reverted. Your opinions, please. Debresser (talk) 21:22, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Miniseries[edit]

Should the title of the article be changed to "Obi-Wan Kenobi (miniseries)", considering that there are no plans for the second season? Boja02 (talk) 09:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think we probably should, per WP:NCTV and the fact we have confirmation in the article that no S2 is planned. Does anyone else have any concerns about us making that move? Do we need a move discussion? - adamstom97 (talk) 12:27, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just because a show only has one season doesn't make it a miniseries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.241.240.42 (talk) 00:23, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it was intended to only be one season from the beginning, like this show was, then it is a miniseries. The only situation where a single-season show could be considered not a miniseries would be if it was intended to be ongoing but was canceled after the first season. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:31, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 18 April 2024[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) ASUKITE 13:50, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Obi-Wan Kenobi (TV series) → Obi-Wan Kenobi (miniseries) – Per the above discussion and WP:NCTV, "(miniseries)" is the correct disambiguation for this article. The fact that there are no further seasons planned is stated and well supported in the article. If don't think this should be controversial but started this discussion to make sure there is visibility first. - adamstom97 (talk) 09:50, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Meh. Seems kind of pointless to move it to miniseries when there is no other Obi-Wan Kenobi television series to disambiguate against. Note that the Taken (miniseries) example given at NCTV disambiguates that page from Taken (2017 TV series). ~~ Jessintime (talk) 14:53, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While no TV series article name forces a disambiguation, we still need to disambiguate from the article on the Kenobi character. The change proposed here is to use a more appropriate disambiguation term. —ADavidB 15:51, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the status quo is fine and I don't really see a compelling reason to change it. Nemov (talk) 15:56, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support article describes a miniseries and that's possible disambiguation so seems most appropiate. Indagate (talk) 15:58, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom and per Indagate. BD2412 T 17:04, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The lead describes it as a miniseries, the infobox doesn't list the number of episodes, and there are categories that say it is a miniseries. All features you would find on an article usually disambiguated as such. Inpops (talk) 12:30, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. "Miniseries" is ambiguous and nobody is entirely sure what it means. It should generally be avoided. "TV series" is perfectly clear to everyone. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:18, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Many people know what it means and it should not "generally be avoided", it is the correct disambiguation per WP:NCTV. - adamstom97 (talk) 13:40, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If you followed debate around it you would know it has more than one meaning and its usage is controversial for that reason. "TV series", on the other hand, is unambiguous. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If you have a problem with it being used as disambiguation like this then you should raise that at WP:NCTV, not try to change the guideline via this move discussion. - adamstom97 (talk) 13:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not. I'm stating a fact about the controversial nature. If you read the miniseries article you will see what I mean. And given the difference in meanings, naming this a "TV series" certainly does not conflict with the naming guideline. It entirely depends on your definition of a miniseries (and mine is obviously not the same as yours). -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Well my definition matches with the established guideline. - adamstom97 (talk) 15:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, no it doesn't. There is no established guideline. For the special case of episodic television known as "miniseries", when disambiguation is required, use: (miniseries) or (serial) according to common usage in reliable sources. That all depends on your definition of a miniseries! -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:17, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. There's nothing ambiguous about the title that requires changing the disambiguator, which I note is shorter and a much more common term in the first place. oknazevad (talk) 15:25, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support "miniseries" is the proper television-related disambiguation for this given the nature of it: it's concluded as a finite piece of media. Disambiguation is needed to differentiate it from the character, and this is now the most appropriate term to use given the information we have now about the future plans (or lack thereof) for this. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:10, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per WP:NCTV. This is pretty explicit in the guideline. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support; this is a valid and correct disambiguator per WP:NCTV (which is the project-wide agreed-upon guideline; "the miniseries article" is not a guideline – it's an article). -- Alex_21 TALK 23:42, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Obi-Wan_Kenobi_(miniseries)&oldid=1220879878"