Jump to content

Talk:List of Murder, She Wrote episodes

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

Episode notability

[edit]

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 00:20, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the individual episode pages should be merged into the list by having very brief summaries of each episode. But, I think the pages for the pilot episode and the TV movies should be kept. Dell9300 22:03, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the info 'suspected' included on some episodes? It's not relevant, and can actually be somewhat of a spoiler.Jb 007clone (talk) 04:52, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Murderer:

[edit]

WHY is all the information about the Murderer, included it really should be taken out.

I agree. It is completely illiterate to reveal the identity of the murderer. Only a consummate buffoon would. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.125.199.91 (talk) 14:49, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are no spoiler alerts on Wikipedia. Quis separabit? 23:24, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Non of the other pages of US Dramas have information about the Murderer, why is Murder She wrote different? --Crazyseiko (talk) 22:12, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and WP:SPOILER, in particular: "Spoilers are no different from any other content and should not be deleted solely because they are spoilers." Skyerise (talk) 17:15, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please give other Examples, I do find this utter strange this page is full of such information, yet others are not.
I don't have to — that's what WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS means. We don't edit by example. We edit by guideline, namely WP:SPOILER, which I quoted above. The information does not have to be added to other articles, but once it has been added, it may not be removed. Skyerise (talk) 14:25, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You attitude is really awful, and I see I rattled your cage aswell since I postage that same warning message you give me. Its Not very nice is it, when a radmon nobody given you mean messages like that which includes "band" threats, you have no say over and to be fair you would also come under the same rules.... What utter rubbish you have come out with once it has been added, it may not be removed there are many times over the years stuff has been taken out off pages, worse still all that Spoiler information has no ref, how do we know you that is the right information? How do we know what is postage is correct? No original research i also believe the section now falls under Wikipedia:Too much detail.
So is yours. I don't think you really belong here if you can't bother to actually care about following our policies and guidelines. Deletion of material that our guidelines specifically say should not be deleted is vandalism and if you continue to remove it, you can expect to be blocked. Skyerise (talk) 17:03, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
again... what about refs? what about Wikipedia:Too much detail.--Crazyseiko (talk) 21:34, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What about consensus? If you want to change the article, you need to obtain a consensus on this talk page. So far, all the current responding editors have disagreed with you. I don't really expect this to change. If you get a consensus, then.... Skyerise (talk) 21:36, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
consensus? its possible as your dug deep into the page you could have misguide view on the page? My point about too much details still stands. Yes its perfectly okay to include something, but if its too much details then it shouldn't be there, hence the reason Wikipedia:Too much detail People are not coming to Wiki get the fall details --Crazyseiko (talk) 22:57, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously, the editors responding differ with your view. Because people views are different, consensus is a necessary part of how Wikipedia articles are developed. Just get consensus for your change, and then you get to make it. But if other editors object, you can't just keep reverting to your preferred version. That's just how it is. Skyerise (talk) 23:57, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
reverting to me preferred version could bring this page in line with wiki policy WP:TOOMUCH, If we are stuck then we will have to asking for others to look at this page. --Crazyseiko (talk) 14:48, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Then that's just how it has to be. Quis separabit? 15:14, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The matter is now referred to the WP:Dispute Resolution Noticeboard.--Crazyseiko (talk) 23:15, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm sure that it's already been said, but Wikipedia does not remove plot information simply because it may be a spoiler. If anyone is concerned that other articles do not include the same type of plot information, then perhaps that should be discussed more broadly. But this article shouldn't be used as a battleground for this discussion. JOJ Hutton 20:11, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Were moved away from that, it all comes down to this: WP:TOOMUCH AND OR the lack of any refs on the page to the information. I believe this may will end up going to an admin broad after the dispute section, but we have to go via the proper channels --Crazyseiko (talk) 20:46, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to have a wrong idea about what admins do. They have no special say in content matters. They just have some special tools that allow them to block people, etc. Skyerise (talk) 21:00, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The idea that Wikipedia has editorial boards is a common misconception, partly because most encyclopedias and other reference sources do have editorial boards. (Wikipedia is an experiment in crowd-sourcing of information.) Robert McClenon (talk) 00:20, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Moderated Discussion

[edit]

I am opening moderated discussion at the dispute resolution noticeboard. Please direct your comments to DRN for the time being. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:36, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Due to the lack of discussion at the dispute resolution noticeboard, I will be closing the discussion there. Instead, the question of whether to identify the murderer in the summary list for each episode of this show, a Request for Comments will be posted. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:18, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RFC: Should each episode identify the murderer?

[edit]
This RfC is now being closed because consensus has been reached. There is clear consensus to include the name of the murderer for each episode in this list. However, this RFC closure does not address two matters that were covered in the discussion: whether the word "murderer" should be in bold here at this list, and whether the names of murderers should be excluded from this list if a corresponding article for the respective broadcast season is created. Those matters would have to be resolved by continuing discussion and/or editing. You might also want to consider whether it makes much sense to name the murderer without previously naming the suspects. Anyway, I got a glimpse of Angela Lansbury last summer at a wedding on Cape Cod, and she looked very well, and glamorous too. :-) Anythingyouwant (talk) 19:51, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion 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.

.... Following is the entire RfC discussion.Anythingyouwant (talk) 19:51, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Should the name of the murderer be included in or excluded from the brief description of each episode? Robert McClenon (talk) 00:36, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

State your view and a concise reason for it in the Survey, as Include or Yes to include it, or Exclude or No to exclude it. Please do not engage in threaded discussion in the Survey; that can go in Threaded Discussion. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:36, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

[edit]
  • YES: There are no spoilers on Wikipedia. Summaries of plays, dramas, films, etc., all indicate how the story/stories ends/end. Are they all going to be rewritten? Murder She Wrote ended its run more than two decades ago, and this is not breaking news. Quis separabit? 01:36, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes but not in its current format. See my comments in the threaded discussion Z1720 (talk) 03:24, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Include I can find no rationale that is supported by any guideline that would exclude the inclusion of vital plot information from the article. Personally, I hate Wikipedia entries that are written as if they were taken straight out of the TV Guide. JOJ Hutton 22:28, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Include, no convincing arguments have been given for excluding them. Skyerise (talk) 17:24, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Include. Specifically identifying the murderer seems a little bit gratuitous, but Wikipedia does not censor spoilers. I don't really see a pressing need for a page split, either. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:41, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Brought here by the request bot. I don't think we can have spoiler-free plot descriptions as Wikipedia is an informational resource, but that doesn't mean we have to have them bold and set apart from the plot description either. So another !vote for "yes but not in the current format". Gamaliel (talk) 01:00, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Include. The bot sent me. If the usual format is to include major plot points including the big reveal of the murderer, then keep it that way. SW3 5DL (talk) 00:40, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Threaded Discussion

[edit]
  • Comment I agree that the murderer should be included in the synopsis because WP:Spoiler says, "It is not acceptable to delete information from an article because you think it spoils the plot." However, I disagree that after each episode synopsis there is a bolded "Murderer" section. I could not find similar featured lists, but Law & Order: Criminal Intent (season 1) is a WP:GOODARTICLE that features a crime and a suspect. I suggest that the List of Murder, She Wrote page be formatted similarly to the L&O:CI list, where the murderer is revealed in the last sentence of the synopsis without any bolded text (and the synopsis includes how the audience discovered who the murderer is.) Z1720 (talk) 03:24, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I got your ping. I don't really favor making any drastic changes. If @User:Z1720's suggestions are taken up won't they require a lot of rewriting (as the episodes as the list currently contain only the barest plot info)? Quis separabit? 11:55, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Quis separabit, I think there is always room to improve an article. My suggestion would mean we take out the bolded "Murderer" line in each episode and incorporate that information in the last sentence of the episode synopsis. It will take some work but not necessarily change a lot in each synopsis. Z1720 (talk) 01:56, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@User:Z1720: "I think there is always room to improve an article" -- certainly so. But are you going to be doing the rewriting to ensure consistency? Quis separabit? 15:39, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If there is consensus on a solution on this talk page, I am more than happy to do the rewriting. Z1720 (talk) 16:30, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Its pretty clear the current page awful and its why were in this current situation, the proof in the pudding is, its no where near WP:GOODARTICLE status, leavening the page as it is, can not be an option. I do found it strange, user just don't care, its like there know the page is bad but would rather keep it as it is since their don't know what to do either. Its only the outside users who have highlight the issues and come up with ideas. AND ONCE again people still fail to get the concept, about the lack of ANY REFS on this page, how do you know all the information is correct? Unless some refs start appear, anyone could take them with good reason. --Crazyseiko (talk) 18:10, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Crazyseiko. Wikipedia is not finished and this article is on its way to improving. I think there is a commitment from some editors, including yourself, to improve the article and I'm excited to see that enthusiasm. I think it's important that all users assume good faith when discussing the page and avoid statements like that users don't care. I do agree with you that we need to get references for this page. Do you know where we could find these references? What else should we focus our attention on? Z1720 (talk) 01:45, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Its nice to see other people finally noticing the lack of references for this page. Ref, The only places I know of that could have references for Episode titles and plot would be the following:

None of these have who the "Murderer" is.--Crazyseiko (talk) 08:24, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This diff shows how difficult a rewrite will be; some stuff will not make sense; @Arderich is trying his best but what he means to say is impossible to discern without having more info. Quis separabit? 16:54, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm getting pretty fed up with the can't do anything attitude, when it comes to this page. This reason for not making changes its hitting rock bottom. Its not brain surgery, and its not that hard to explain the basic outline of a plot.... If that is the case the most of the plot information should just be taken out! --Crazyseiko (talk) 18:21, 28 June 2015 (UTC)--Crazyseiko (talk) 18:21, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
While the editing process might be difficult, and might take a long time, I am willing to go through the whole thing myself and fix it up. As Wikipedia is not finished please do not expect one edit to fix all the problems in the article. Also, please do not expect that the "fixed" version be complete in a short time because there are also real life obligations that will delay the process for all editors. Editors should join in adding sources, copyediting or fixing another episode synopsis in the approved template. I will soon post a new comment with the suggested template for the changes. See my comment below. Z1720 (talk) 21:05, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would happily help out and fix up this page, including adding in more refs etc but we need to get the foundation sorted before you add in more bricks. ( this also included the fact if the page has revised format for details, there no point adding stuff in which may get taken back out.) Over the past six years I'll never seen one edit solve all the problems for one page, but I do believe if we pull up our socks and stop chasing our tails, we will sort out this page before we reach August ;) . --Crazyseiko (talk) 21:28, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment So I'm looking at different lists of episodes in the featured lists and I am noticing that there are two different types of pages. One article is a list of all episodes of a series which does not have an episode synopsis under each episode (example here) and another is a list of episodes within a season (example here, examples from the same show.) The list of all episodes from a television program does not include an episode-by-episode synopsis. The articles of individual seasons do have episode-by-episode synopsis.

I believe we should split the material on this page to reflect the model outlined in the above two examples. The "List of Murder, She Wrote episodes" will not include a synopsis, while the articles for each season will include a modified synopsis. Thoughts? Z1720 (talk) 22:02, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you/we start making changes to this page. Its very clear most people either don't care or can't come up with any reasonable rebuttal to you good suggestion or my points about the issues on the page which your good idea will reslove. --Crazyseiko (talk) 16:57, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi everyone, I am going on vacation in a couple of days, but when I return next week I will begin the split option. If you disagree with this decision, please comment below and we can discuss this. Z1720 (talk) 00:44, 7 July 2015 (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.

How to resolve the issues from the RFC?

[edit]

As said, the there are some outstanding issues which need to be resloved, which I hope will also sort out the left of refs and also how its formatted. --Crazyseiko (talk) 23:27, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is a complete joke, nothing has been sorted out with this. Page format is a disgrace, and needs changing, yet nothing has? WHY not? --Crazyseiko (talk) 15:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


I have started with season one, which is only a bit better. Alas alot of the issues remain including the awful plot, which I must point out I dont have time to complete reword everything at this moment. Who every wrote that page out just copied and past alot or the descriptions from http://www.tv.com/shows/murder-she-wrote/ I'm surprised how bad this page has been allowed to exist and go unnoticed to users who believe in high stranded. I would like to know from any user, how the changes I have made to Season 1 section is worse than what I replaced? IE https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyright_violations or https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Plagiarism --Crazyseiko (talk) 15:06, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://web.archive.org/web/20060618063223/http://www.epguides.com/MurderSheWrote/season1.shtml (archived 18 June 2006). Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:23, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But now the guest cast and identity of the murderer are missing! This page isn't much use now. Philsr3 (talk) 19:29, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://web.archive.org/web/20120208114603/http://www.imdb.com:80/title/tt0653526, https://web.archive.org/web/20151105154852/http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087757/ and the like. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:54, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Justlettersandnumbers: I am curious as to what you are referring the copyright too? Because of the disruption I can't see what has been copyvio. I had a look and I don't see anything that's been copied directly from IDMB. Govvy (talk) 22:08, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Govvy: The episode summaries were copied from Imdb. That is a copyvio....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:24, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@WilliamJE: I don't see copyvio what so ever for season one when I looked. I think this is blown out of proportion. Govvy (talk) 12:11, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Govvy, your ping didn't work because you didn't sign in the same edit. If you look at the links in my initial post in this section you will see archived versions of two IMDb pages that were copied verbatim into our page. You can't see them in the article history because they have been hidden. I also found other copyvio from similar IMDb pages, as did WilliamJE. There's no doubt about this, and no exaggeration – our copyright rules are a WP:Policy with legal considerations, and we need to make sure we stick to them. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:45, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I know all about copyright, I just disagree with your conclusion, I found this article helpful before you destroyed it all, now it's just ruined. Govvy (talk) 18:25, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 2 December 2020

[edit]

Change title of episode 2-10 from "Sticks & Stones" to "Sticks and Stones".

The title is shown on-screen with the word "and" rather than an ampersand. Title appears 1:43 into the episode (as viewed on the Universal Studios Home Entertainment DVD). 2601:45:400:3652:882B:8DC9:56E6:59B5 (talk) 01:51, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 02:46, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 2 December 2020 (2)

[edit]

Change episode 4-14 title from "Curse of the Daanau" to "Curse of the Daanav".

The last letter is a "v" as in Victor, not a "u" as in Uniform. Title is displayed on-screen at 1:22 in (as viewed on the Universal DVD). Comparing the "v" in "Daanav" to the "u" in "Curse" confirms they are different characters. The pronunciation of the word by the actors also confirms the last letter is a "v". 2601:45:400:3652:9D52:564C:DFA6:53BC (talk) 15:14, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 22:48, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 February 2021

[edit]

I'd like to add episode descriptions for the episodes not yet described. My source would be the licensed DVD collection, each episode of which I'd watch and then summarise. PythiaHD (talk) 11:09, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Murder,_She_Wrote_episodes&oldid=1208270359"