Forums: Index > Article Content > Big Bird in season 5
Participation in the Muppet Wiki Forums requires a full understanding of the Rules and Etiquette.
The way the character evaluation pages work is we say the name of a production that a specific image comes from. And thanks to Tony, I learned that this picture comes from Episode 0641. So is it okay if I change the Big Bird Through the Years page to say that the image comes from Season 5? Anthony (talk) 05:49, July 27, 2023 (UTC)
- That feels contradictory for series (as opposed to movies or one time things) when the heading has a year *range* for when that puppet was used to note start and end points. If that's how we want to start handling it, almost all of the pages in that category need to be revised to only include one year, and the descriptions adjusted. Also if it's going to be changed per episode, then the episode needs to actually be cited in the article, and not just the season. There's some of that existing for the early Big Bird entries where it changed so frequently, but otherwise the articles in the category aren't handling the content the way you say they are. If that is how we want to do it, it sounds like the most sensible change isn't just to change seasons and stick an episode number at random in an edit summary with no other explanation, but to actually include the episode number, nd then rewrite the description to better clarify and be consistent. In fact, at least one entry on Oscar the Grouch Through the Years does just that ( the sixth Episode 0573, but the rest don't, and it still doesn't change the dates in parentheses to only be the date of that episode (1974 isn't "ca. early-mid 1970s.")
- The image for Oscar the Grouch Through the Years for changes supposedly from season 44 on Oscar the Grouch Through the Years is a photo puppet that could be almost any year from that period (and the date in parentheses given is 2012). In general, it doesn't look like the pages are intentionally following the pattern you describe at all, and any instances where dates and seasons only match the source of the picture looks mainly coincidental. I actually think specifying the episode is a good thing, makes for better sourcing, but just changing seasons without actually including specifics in the article is confusing. It also doesn't feel like this is based on any consensus that I'm aware of for "the way the character evaluation pages work," unless I've missed something, and if it is again current pages suggest it hasn't been applied with any consistency. Ant, when you said this was how the pages work, are you citing some past discussion I've missed or an exchange on someone's talk pages, or just your interpretation? -- Andrew 06:21, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- It's my interpretation. For example, Fozzie Bear Through the Years. -- Anthony (talk) 08:10, July 27, 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah, we need to go by consensus and make it a clear guideline if that is how the community wants to go, Ant. Not just your interpretation citing one page, when others aren't doing the same. Even Fozzie doesn't prove your claim. The caption for the first image says "First two episodes," which I think works because it's clear and makes sense. But your take would be to just change it to "episode one" since the image isn't from the second episode. As I said earlier, it's clearer to readers when it applies to movies and the text is tailored to match better if it's just using one appearance as an example. Basically, if we do decide on this approach, we need to implement in a way that's clear to other editors and readers, and to me that's better done by specifying the episode *and* making changes to the description and not just "As seen in/year" to specify an episode rather than an unclear change to the season. -- Andrew 13:42, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- That would make more sense, but there should also be consensus and shared understanding of how to approach this. Ant, if you read what I said in my first response, "That feels contradictory for series (as opposed to movies or one time things) when the heading has a year *range* for when that puppet was used to note start and end points." I was already making a distinction from those.
- So it makes a lot more sense to label a Follow That Bird image as being from it and tweak text, then to suddenly change the range listed of how long the puppet was used by changing seasons. To make those match, yes, either all ranges need to be adjusted and based on a community consensus (and not just your interpretation) as to whether they decide to claim it only starts when you find out where a picture comes from (which again doesn't even make sense with photo puppets and so on on some of these anyway); specify episode and then season ranges in parentheses (regardless of which season the image is from; that's probably my own preference); or move season ranges to the description entirely at the top or something. In general, Ant, it feels like this really needs to be something where everyone is on the same page. Ask Tony to weigh in since he's done so much work in that area, wait until there's more than you and I discussing this (ideally at least four or more). I don't think this needs to be a rushed "I want to make this single change" thing when the arguments you're advancing really affect a lot of articles. So please don't change anything, Ant, until there's actually a consensus. -- Andrew 17:46, 1 August 2023 (UTC)