Talk:The End of the F***ing World

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The End of the F***ing World article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 6 months

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 2 times. The weeks in which this happened:

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television: British / Episode coverage Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the British television task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Self-defence

At one point, one of the detectives suggests that, if the defence of self-defence was raised, it would only reduce the charge to manslaughter. I don't know whether this was intentional or not, but this is a pretty fundamental mistake of English criminal law. Self-defence is a complete defence to all forms of unlawful use of force, including murder, and does not simply reduce the charge to manslaughter. I suspect what they were thinking of was loss of control, which does only reduce the sentence. In other words, if the jury finds you've acted in self-defence, then they must find you not guilty. It's a pretty insignificant point considering the nature of the show, but in order to ensure that the mistake isn't perpetuated here, I've included the line that the detective's statement was a mistake. Grieferhate (talk) 21:35, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This may be correct in law, but constitutes Original Research. It's beyond the remit of Wikipedia to highlight every factual inaccuracy in every fictional work. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 20:27, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Titles"

I'll start a discussion here. A listing of "Episode #" isn't a title in the correct sense of a title. These episodes don't have titles, "Episode #" is simply a designation number for where the episode comes in the order of the series. There have already been discussions that have agreed upon this for the television project; I'm in the process of finding them. -- Alex^TW 12:46, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If there's wider consensus against it then I'm happy to concede, but my opinion is that the "correct sense of a title" of an episode is just "a string used to uniquely describe an episode within the context of a series or season". The "Episode #" is used to describe the episode on Channel 4 and Netflix's websites, and it is how I would refer to an episode in discussions, and in that way its usage is no different to 'real' episode titles. — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 13:29, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

From Merriam-Webster, a title is "the distinguishing name of a written, printed, or filmed production". These are not distinguishing names, they are simply #1, #2, #3, etc. in an episode listing. A title isn't how we "describe" an entry/episode of a series, it is a unique name given to the episode. Something like Altered Carbon, another Netflix series - that particular series has actual episode titles, and therefore they are listed as such with quotes around them. Other examples are Humans or Call the Midwife, where each episode restarts at Episode 1 every season. This means that for Humans, there are two Episode 1's; Call the Midwife has seven Episode 1's. This means that "Episode #" is in no way distinguishing. -- Alex^TW 13:40, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I said "series or season" because of examples like Call the Midwife. It is a unique name within each season; "distinguishing names" is essentially synonymous to the definition I made up, and supports my case. If you look at the featured article Episode 2 (Twin Peaks), it uses quotes around "Episode 2". — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 14:25, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you said "series or season", but I am of the belief that it is only the series that is relevant, because if I say "Episode 1 of Humans", then that is not distinguishing or clear as to what I'm talking about. Am I talking about Series 1, Episode 1, or Series 2, Episode 1? That means that "distinguishing names" is in relation to the entire series, not just part of the series, and hence it is not a unique name at all. -- Alex^TW 14:37, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not a Netflix show

It seems common for VOD providers (Amazon, Netflix, Hulu, etc.) to label their purchased programming from other regions as "Original" programming. Star Trek Discovery, for example, is listed as a Netflix original in the UK. Derek was a Channel 4 production marketed as a Netflix Original elsewhere, but is not a Netflix show. As far as I can make out, this is a Channel 4 production, later acquired by Netflix. Does anyone have any sources that confirm that Netflix were actually involved in the production? --wooden superman 08:04, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure it's necessary? The article makes no claim that it's a Netflix production, less a Netflix "original" programme, which would imply no input from anybody else. The lede makes it clear:

The End of the F***ing World is a British dark comedy-drama television programme, based on a graphic novel of the same name by Charles Forsman. The eight-part programme premiered its first episode on Channel 4 in the United Kingdom on 24 October 2017, after which all eight episodes were released on All 4. It was released by Netflix internationally on 5 January 2018.

That seems fairly unambiguous to me? Chaheel Riens (talk) 11:29, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. But it is categorized as a Netflix show, and is included on the {{Netflix}} navbox. My attempts to rectify this were reverted. --wooden superman 11:37, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, List of original programs distributed by Netflix claims it as a co-production. I'm not sure why the onus is on me to prove a negative. Surely the person claiming that it is a co-production needs to source this. --wooden superman 11:45, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Your recent WP:BOLD edit has been reverted. Per WP:BRD, after a bold edit is reverted, the WP:STATUSQUO should remain while a discussion is started, and it should be resolved before reinstating the edits, after a needed WP:CONSENSUS is formed to keep it.

It is advertised as a "Netflix original series", and therefore belongs in the identically-titled template {{Netflix original series}}. -- Alex^TW 11:47, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's actually not the case. Lots of things are advertised as Netflix Originals that they had no hand in the production of. See the examples of Star Trek Discovery and Derek above and all the entries at List of original programs distributed by Netflix#Exclusive international television distribution. A marketing device is not proof of production involvement. As we only list the original network it would be inappropriate to include acquired programming in the navbox for these, or categorize them as such, in the same way we do not include UK programming on US network navboxes, categories, etc. --wooden superman 11:52, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

These sources [1][2] would seem to back up my claim. --wooden superman 11:56, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is true that VOD services acquire international rights to many shows, such as Star Trek Discovery, and label them as 'Originals'. Those shows should not be included on templates related to Netflix, although they do seem to occasionally find their way onto them as users are (perhaps understandably) confused as to what is, and what is not an Original. However, in this case Netflix co-produced the show with Channel 4 and were involved with the production and so it should be included on any appropriate templates/pages. Channel 4 themselves refer to it as "a co-production with Netflix"[3], so I think it is fairly obvious that it is a co-production in this case. You mention that you are frustrated that the onus is on you to prove a negative, but you keep deleting information without checking good sources first. You made the same error on Hard Sun before you were corrected[4]. If you're not sure please take it to the Talk page first, and not after you've been reverted multiple times, and asked to. This 'delete first, ask questions later' is bound to frustrate other users. Somethingwickedly (talk) 14:20, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for that link, it seems that this is a genuine co-production. This sort of thing really needs to be properly discussed and sourced in the articles if we're going to categorize shows like this. --wooden superman 14:25, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is mentioned in the article, albeit clunkily: "Entwistle and Buchanan decided to make a television series with Clerkenwell Films, and then Channel 4 and Netflix became involved." (This probably needs rephrasing but I can't work out how.) — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 14:27, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The actual source for that is even vaguer and doesn't confirm the extent of Netflix's involvement: "It became a series, and then eventually they got Channel 4 involved, and then finally Netflix popped on". --wooden superman 14:31, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It didn't need to be discussed as the given source is already in the article; what should have happened was something along the lines of you doing your research first, instead of edit-warring and removing the content multiple times. -- Alex^TW 14:29, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The one source attributed to the Netflix broadcast describes it as an import: "The upcoming eight-part series The End of the F*ing World, based on the graphic novel of the same (non-asterisked) name, first aired on the U.K.'s Channel 4 back in October. This first U.S. trailer dropped just days before it's arrival, too, as Netflix surprisingly announced the comedy import can be binged starting Friday, January 5" If these shows are bona fide Netflix co-productions and categorized as such, that element should be properly sourced also. Readers should not have to read through every single linked article to try and confirm this information for themselves. --wooden superman 14:36, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SOFIXIT. -- Alex^TW 14:42, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I tried, but as nearly all of the other sources seemed to be leading me in the other direction, I unfortunately "fixed" it the wrong way. Thankfully, that Channel 4 press pack seems conclusive. --wooden superman 14:45, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not cancelled yet

The producer said "for me, that’s it now. Yeah, that’s done". That's not an official end to the show, that's a Channel 4/Netflix decision, season 2 wasn't announced untill months later after the first one, so until there's an official statement from the channels, we should leave it as still running. DCF94 (talk) 09:22, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Word from the series creator is as official as it needs to be. We don't require word from only the channel. -- /Alex/₂₁ 12:20, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]