Talk:American Horror Story: Roanoke/Archive 1

"Also known as AHS: My Roanoke Nightmare"?

I don't think that is an accurate statement. There is no promotional materials besides the one promo which referred to the show as "My Roanoke Nightmare: A True American Horror Story". In any event, I think we need to remove this sentence. 68.100.254.133 (talk) 12:37, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

@Changeisgame and LLArrow: You both need to stop edit warring and discuss the changes you wish to make, or not make here. Chase (talk) 20:32, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with you! I tried talking with the user, but he was refusing to see the fact. Sorry for this silly mess. Thanks, Changeisgame (talk) 20:40, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 15 September 2016

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved; early close per official confirmation of title. Snuggums (talk / edits) 13:25, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

---

American Horror Story: Roanoke → American Horror Story (season 6) – There has been no official confirmation of an official title for this season. "My Roanoke Nightmare" is the name of a show within the show. The marketing (e.g. posters, social media accounts, teasers) do not show any name at all. MyNameIsASDF (talk) 21:45, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Official social media accounts now market the season as American Horror Story: Roanoke. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 22:03, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Where? Exactly where does it say the title "American Horror Story: Roanoke"? Has FX confirmed this title? Has any outlet referred to this season under that title? Has it ever been promoted under that title? MyNameIsASDF (talk) 23:20, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@MyNameIsASDF: If you would read down below, here? Also here, here, here, here. Chase (talk) 22:27, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Their official facebook, twitter, etc have changed their profile pictures to promotional image which reads "American Horror Story: Roanoke". The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 22:34, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@Bookkeeperoftheoccult: Pointing out that social media has zero relevence here. That mostly isn't a reliable source. Chase (talk) 22:35, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

I should have phrased it as 'sources used are pointing to the new social media image as confirmation from FX'. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 22:44, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@MyNameIsASDF: It is on the official website FFS! Stop trying to police things when you're wrong. Johnny0929 (talk) 23:10, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Johnny0929 Did you acccidently ping me in that? Chase (talk) 23:13, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

CCamp2013 Yeah sorry I'm still new to talk page edits... Johnny0929 (talk) 23:14, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Johnny0929 It's alright just be careful. Chase (talk) 23:16, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Can this move request be closed now? Chase (talk) 23:16, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Oppose: The official website, as well as all the media accounts, call it "American Horror Story: Roanoke". DARTHBOTTO _talk•cont 06:09, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Oppose: Same reason as DarthBotto, the official website has confirmed the subtle for the season. Can't get more official than that folks. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 07:15, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose and close please. Mal-researched move request. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 07:39, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The Theme

If people checked news concerning the media they'd know Season 6 has been confirmed as American Horror Story: Forest. I edited it as such and some ignorant person changed it back to American Horror Story (season 6). Not to mention Sarah Paulson has now also officially been confirmed to be starring this season yet when I added her to the cast list most likely this same ignorant person took her off of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Queennnnnnn (talk • contribs) 14:09, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Please maintain civility when posting information here, do not call others ignorant. Your addition completely lacks any source and is not verifiable. Hence it is reverted. Continuing to add your own personal interpretation without a source is considered original research and will be reported. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 14:30, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Rotating season art

Just an FYI, I'm going to be uploading the most recent official art for the season, whenever a new one is unveiled by the network. This will continue until FX brands one the standard identifier; which I'm guessing will be after the first episode has aired. So much secrecy and moving parts... LLArrow (talk) 00:38, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

@LLArrow: The newest one doesn't need to be the one displayed every time. Just stick with one and be done with it. If each revealed new information determinantal to the article, then sure, but they do not. Alex|The|Whovian^? 02:00, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

That's your opinion. If you can tally consensus, I'll be glad to stop, if not, the rest of us involve the revolving art and guessing game. Peace and love Alex, LLArrow (talk) 05:59, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

I will have to agree with AlexTheWhovian LLArrow. These promo arts are not at all detrimental and keeping changing them is not necessary at all. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 08:36, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Because they're not all pivotal is the very reason they must continually update to the most recent. We don't know which is relevant to the series, we can only go by what the series deems relevant at the time, therefore changing it here. It's simple. Please people, don't overcomplicate. There's no harm in keeping the image up to date. After the season premieres I'm sure we'll have some clarity, until then we remain pliable. LLArrow (talk) 08:52, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Now that there is support to not continuously update the poster, we shall wait for you to gain support for your own opinion on what is relevant and regain a consensus that you didn't originally have. Don't over-complicate by uploading what you don't need to, else I'll be more than happy to take this to MOS:TV for you. Peace and love. Alex|The|Whovian^? 09:51, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

You do what you feel necessary, and I'll do the same. LLArrow (talk) 20:08, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

I am glad that you realize that you no longer hold a consensus. I shall do just that. Alex|The|Whovian^? 02:11, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

@AlexTheWhovian, LLArrow, and IndianBio: LLArrow has asked me to weigh in on the discussion on my talk page. There seems to be consensus that new art doesn't need to be displayed every time they're unveiled by the network. -- I dream of horses  If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message  (talk to me) (My edits) @ 03:15, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Since consensus is clearly swaying a different direction, I will not be pursuing a different outcome. Good day all, especially Alex ;) LLArrow (talk) 05:04, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Just wanted to add my opinion. I feel like the most popular or most significant season art should be the picture until we definitely know what the season is about or we have a definite dvd cover art. Brocicle (talk) 10:08, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

In this case, we don't have the most popular one because they release so many of them coninuously. I would prefer to stick to the first one released until the official poster/DVD cover. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 12:11, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

I agree. Either the first, or the most popular, since we won't have a DVD cover for quite a while. Alex|The|Whovian^? 12:17, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

I say put them up as they get released. Why not? It's clearly a marketing ploy by the network but I think we should keep adding them as they come in. Ted|Eskey^? 12:17, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

I added speculated in parenthesis underneath the art that is currently there right now. I think this should solve the entire issue but let me know if it doesn't do it. Ted|Eskey^? 12:17, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Does not work given that the image isn't in doubt of being official. It was released officially, therefore it is official season art. The issue is dead altogether until the season premieres, so let us all gather 'round and play a rousing rendition of the waiting game. LLArrow (talk) 22:18, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Loved how you put it LLArrow, nevertheless excited for the season haha. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 08:43, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Alright official season art has now been selected by the network, that is what we will display here, as has always been the case. No new uploads and no reversions. 08:39, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 September 2016

"This is the first season to not...."

s.b.

"This is the first season not to...."

Most common English grammar error currently in use.

174.88.55.54 (talk) 22:18, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Done Topher385 (talk) 22:23, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Removing sentence about "The Mist"

I know the season premieres tomorrow and the page will be updated then, but should this sentence (no ref) from the intro paragraph be removed for the time being: "However, although not officially confirmed, it has been widely reported by the media that the subtitle will be American Horror Story: The Mist." - Melodyschamble (talk) 15:05, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

No, the information is more than properly sourced further down the article. Leads are not recommended to contain refs; only reason for absence. LLArrow (talk) 21:06, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. Looking forward to seeing this (possibly) updated during the premiere tonight. Melodyschamble (talk) 18:46, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

My Roanoke Nightmare

There's no source about the official name of this season being 'AHS: My Roanoke Nightmare'. It's the name of the show within a show. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.56.43.3 (talk) 03:19, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@74.56.43.3: here? Chase (talk) 03:23, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Also here, here, here, here. Shall I go on? Chase (talk) 03:26, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

I think we should wait until the network calls it this way. This is all inference from the premiere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.56.43.3 (talk) 03:53, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

They are reliable sources. We report reliable sources and that is what they are saying. Plus, the premiere had those words before every commercial break. Even if this is wrong, we have no choice but to say thats what it is. We go on the information we have, not the possibily of it being wrong. Chase (talk) 03:55, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

I think we should be a little more cautious. Doesn't it strike you as a really odd title anyway compared to the other seasons? None of these sources are speaking authoritatively. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.56.43.3 (talk) 04:07, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

It doesn't matter that we think it might be wrong, sources say otherwise. If AHS reveals a new one, then we will change it. Until then, we have to go by sources. Chase (talk) 04:12, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

FX identifies it as AHS: 6 on its website. No mention of 'My Roanoke Nightmare'. That's really the only source that matters. Not that complicated. Reviewers didn't receive any screeners anyway, so they're just inferring from the same stuff we all saw. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.56.43.3 (talk) 04:23, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

"#Allsourcesmatter". Chase (talk) 04:27, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

So does critical thinking. Use it once in a while. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.56.43.3 (talk) 04:28, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

That is WP:OR. Chase (talk) 04:29, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Those sources are the ones creating original research. There's nothing to back it up. No promotional material that labels it this way. It's not been referred this way by the network. No credits with that subtitle within the show with the AHS in front of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.56.43.3 (talk) 04:37, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

you need to re-read WP:OR. Chase (talk) 04:46, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

At Wikipedia we go by what reliable sources are reporting. We cannot just make things up in our heads or deem reliable sources incorrect because we don't agree with what they're saying. As of right now, all sources are calling this the title. If this is disproven in the coming future, it will be changed. But you have nothing to support your argument here as it goes against basic Wikipedia rules. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 04:53, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Oh come on, you guys are just being obstinate because you screwed it up. Use your goddamn head a bit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.56.43.3 (talk) 05:35, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

again, wp:or Chase (talk) 05:37, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

(→) IP user please learn to sign your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Next, editors have given enough verifiable source to indicate that My Roanoke Nightmare is the subtitle, so stop the whining and just move on! —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 07:56, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

The official Twitter has it titled American Horror Story: My Roanoke Nightmare. See here. So it is the official title. 109.246.11.34 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:34, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

So far, there has been no official mention of a subtitle. Look at hte main page. It still says American Horror Story. "My Roanoke Nightmare is the name of a show within a show. The page should be reverted back to the title "American Horror Story (season 6)". You don't have to look too far to see that there is no title for this season so far. -MyNameIsASDF (talk). 22:36, 15 September, 2016. (UTC)

TV Line reported that FX officially confirmed the season's theme as Roanoke.[1] J. A. Zwierzcowski (talk) 22:21, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

The subtitle for this season is "Roanoke". The "6" will no longer be used as the subtitle. Here is the official FX page. http://www.fxnetworks.com/shows/american-horror-story/episodes This also confirms the right teaser and image. so I think it would be prudent to use.Changeisgame (talk) 22:48, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

The title of the first episode

Why instead of Chapter 1 does not write the name of the first episode? Why was not this published? 31.223.133.136 (talk) 10:54, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Because that is the name of the episide, so calm down. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 10:59, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Ok. But who will write a plot for tonight episode? I didn't watch it, so can't wait for new article. 31.223.133.136 (talk) 11:37, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Changes

@TedEskey: Please discuss the changes you wish to make here. Thanks. Chase (talk) 18:56, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Angela Bassett, Sarah Paulson, and Cuba Gooding Jr. are the actual people not the re-enactors. The re-enactors are the people narrating the documentary after the fact. Ted|Eskey^? 12:17, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@TedEskey: you're wrong. It is evident in this picture that Sarah and Cuba are the reenactors. This is a screen shot from the beginning of the first episode. 192.5.215.225 (talk) 14:49, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Also minor point but re-enactors is spelled wrong on the page as well. Ted|Eskey^? 12:17, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@TedEskey: Lily Rabe is the real, present-day Shelby, and in the re-enacted timeline she's played by Sarah Paulson. André Holland is Matt in the present, and he's played by Cuba Gooding Jr. in the flashback (those who watched The People vs. O.J. Simpson may appreciate this particular casting choice). We also have Matt's sister Lee, played by Adina Porter in the present and AHS fave Angela Bassett in the past. Chase (talk) 19:04, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@TedEskey: reenactor Chase (talk) 19:04, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Well I'm still going to change the spelling on re-enactors and fine I'll concede on the larger point. Would still like to hear from the creators mouthes who is the re-enactor and whose not before we make this decision but for the sake of not flogging a dead horse I'll let it go. Ted|Eskey^? 12:17, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

I'll point to how they spell re-enacted above and call it day. Ted|Eskey^? 12:17, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@TedEskey: Re-enactor would be wrong. Chase (talk) 19:09, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Fine! Whatever! I no longer care. Ted|Eskey^? 12:17, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

I am however going to make a change to that horrible description of Chapter 1 in the description box in the episode section. Ted|Eskey^? 12:17, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@TedEskey: I have nothing to do with those, so go ahead. That's someone else's problem. Chase (talk) 19:16, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:American Horror Story: Roanoke which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 22:02, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

My Roanoke Nightmare inclusion

Although the season is not officially labeled My Roanoke Nightmare there is zero harm in adding it to the lead as "(also referred to...)". Many articles have referenced the name and it is prevalent within the show itself. Let's see what everyone else thinks, LLArrow (talk) 01:52, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

The reason other sites referred to it as American Horror Story: My Roanoke Nightmare was because there was a lack of a official subtitle during the premier, so they grabbed whatever title they could have when writing their articles... This season incases a show that is titled "My Roanoke Nightmare". So that's the title of the show, the documentary. The entire season is entitled Roanoke. Have you not read the references provided? All official FX American horror story pages bear a photo that confirms the title of the season. The harm is that it is incorrect. There's my take, good night Changeisgame (talk) 03:51, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

No one is claiming that My Roanoke Nightmare is any way an official title of the season, however it constantly referenced and displayed on the show, easily confusing viewers (half of my friends ignorantly refer to it as My Roanoke Night). I'm saying that it deserves a simple reference in the lead, stating it is at times "referred to as". The proliferation demands it. 04:31, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

It is included in the "plot" section so calm down. This should be the last we hear of that. Thanks. Johnny0929 (talk) 18:02, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

@Johnny0929: Firstly 'do not instruct me to do anything, you're lord of none. Your word isn't spoken, then done. We here, on Wikipedia, follow the democratic process which is what is being engaged. If you're not a part of that process, you should not be contributing. LLArrow (talk) 19:50, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

@LLArrow: Funny how your definition of a "democratic process" is you arbitrarily editing this page without discussing it. Just because you think it is right, it doesn't mean it is. Do you know what democratic process means? Johnny0929 (talk) 21:09, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

If I was "arbitrarily' editing any page, I would be long banned. Are you aware of its definition?. Obviously you're not a fan of discussion either, or you would be contributing substance instead hurling baseless claims? Next. LLArrow (talk) 02:44, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

I saw this section after the fact, but I made an edit which references the documentary-style format for the season. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 14:26, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

The Roanoke subtitle is possibly fake cause FX is still billing season 6 as My Roanoke Nightmare. Can we just go back to that subtitle.S hannon434 (talk) 06:01, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

@S hannon434:Would you mind providing a link to the official site referring to the title as My Roanoke Nightmare? LLArrow (talk) 06:41, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

From what I can gather, the season subtitle is Roanoke and the documentry style that this season is doing is titled My Roanoke Nightmare. I think we should just stick to the subtitle. Brocicle (talk) 08:12, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Cast and Characters

It makes zero sense whatsoever to have Sarah's role as "Shelby Miller" and have Lily's character as Shelby Miller. Who changed it from the reenactors to the quotation marks? It makes the whole cast and character section confusing to people who have not seen the episodes. Just put the reenactor back GDI. Johnny0929 (talk) 18:05, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

I was very confused seeing the quotation marks. To a viewer who hasn't seen the episode, this would make no sense. The (reenactor) needs to be added unless we find a more efficient way to distinguish between the real Millers and the actors portraying the Millers. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 18:19, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

There is such a thing as List of American Horror Story characters, which is the place to be overly descriptive to a non-viewer about the series, not here. We are not a TV Guide, fulfilling every wish and whimsy of would-be viewers. MOS:TV does not allow for any sort of designation in the cast list, quotation marks are. LLArrow (talk) 19:56, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

@LLArrow: How is adding (reenactor) overly descriptive? The reason people look at the cast and characters section in the specific seasons in this show is to find out what character the same actors portray in specific seasons. It does not help when two of the main cast members of this show portray characters with the same name without any distinction besides the quotation marks. You, however, are welcome to use notations such as stars or crosses and then at the end specify "cross means these are the reenactors in the MRN series within the season" or something to the effect. Otherwise you're just confusing everybody. Johnny0929 (talk) 21:14, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

@Johnny0929 and Jjj1238: I have notified the editor, who has commented above, that they must discuss the changes here and find some sort of consensus. That editor seems to be the only one that wants these changes made. If the editor implements the changes without a result here, please revert the edit. This editor has been engaged in some edit wars in the past and I have notified the editor this is not the way to propose changes, and it creates tension instead of improving Wikipedia. Thank you. Chase (talk) 20:45, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Chase, your passive aggressiveness does not go unchecked. High and mighty doesn't tend to fly too high 'round these parts. As of now I'm not pressing this issue, but it shall be revisited in the near future. LLArrow (talk) 02:32, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Honestly, the only "high and mighty" I observe is you... You literally act like you're better than everyone else and how you're and expert at democratic process and you're an expert in editing when all you do is edit warring on this page lol. I guess being "democratic" means that you begrudgingly agree to the majority while threatening that you'd do whatever you want in the future? 68.100.254.133 (talk) 07:59, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

I have no clue where you've been or what you've read, but it has zilch to do with me. I'll repeat myself once, I'm dropping this issue. Next. LLArrow (talk) 08:24, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

I really don't see an overly big issue with either options, just as you could add "(younger)" or "(flashback)" after the character's name. The whole argument of it's not TV guide is fair enough but if it allows the viewer to understand the subject matter than it is a valid reason to detail the character of the same name. It'd be a lot easier if the actors playing Shelby and Matt also had names besides the people they are reenacting as. You could always at a note after the characters name and under the list of cast have the list notes for those who wish to read about it. Example:

• Kathy Bates
• Sarah Paulson as Shelby Miller¹
• Cuba Gooding Jr. as Matt Miller²
• Lily Rabe as Shelby Miller
• André Holland as Matt Miller
• Denis O'Hare
• Wes Bentley
• Evan Peters
• Cheyenne Jackson
• Angela Bassett as Lee³

• ^1 Sarah Paulson played an actor reenacting the part of Shelby Miller.
• ^2 Cuba Gooding Jr. played an actor reenacting the part of Matt Miller.
• ^3 Angela Bassett played an actor reenacting the part of Lee.

This is always another option... Kelege (talk) 11:17, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

I think adding the word (reenactor)/(re-enactor) is fine and actually the simplest way to clarify the interviewee and the mocumentary cast. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 14:42, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

@Kelege:I think your suggested solution is inspired, and I support it wholeheartedly. LLArrow (talk) 18:57, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

WHAT IS HAPPENING TO THE SECTiON I THOUGHT WE AGREED ON REENACTORS??? 68.100.254.133 (talk) 03:31, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Please maintain Civility else I will remove your ability to add in talk pages. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 09:57, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

That sounded like frustration to the edit war in this page. I fail to see the incivility in this instance. I guess threatening to silence unregistered users is civil? Johnny0929 (talk) 14:20, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Writing in capitals is considered as shouting and is incivil. I donot need to justify to you. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 14:22, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Threatening others using your status is incivil as well. You need to justify to everyone on this page because otherwise it looks like you're abusing your power. Johnny0929 (talk) 14:28, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Again I don't need to justify, and you can carry on this hyperventilation, I care a rat's ass. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 14:43, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

You care "a rat's ass" yet you care enough to keep commenting and threaten to ban people from editing in the talk page? So civil of you! It is obvious that you're the one panicking and hyperventilating. I hope you can actually take constructive criticism one day since it does not look like you're very versed in that. Johnny0929 (talk) 14:53, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Mmmmm, bite me! —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 15:04, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

@IndianBio: @Johnny0929: Wikipedia is NOT a battleground. Let's focus on benefiting the pages and using talk pages to do so, and not flood them with trivial fights. Kelege (talk) 16:50, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

How was I turning this into a battleground? He was the one threatening others because he thinks he's always right and picking fights with me. Johnny0929 (talk) 18:53, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Please stop changing the word "reenactor" to "re-enactor". The latter is not a correct spelling of the word. Johnny0929 (talk) 14:18, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

• I tried to put in place this, but it was reverted. I don't nesarcarilly agree with it, but the amount of "(reenactors)" is starting to get overbearing. Plus, they are the main part of the show. Any thoughts? Chase (talk) 23:18, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Thoughts? I have a few. Having a simple descriptor after these characters' names is hardly distracting or unpleasant. Ultimately, after the season has completed, there may be something to talk about, but as of now we need to sit on this subject and let the season develop a bit more. This merely an aesthetic issue, nothing more. LLArrow (talk) 23:34, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Weren't you the one in favor of removing "(reenactor)" because it looked clunky or something like that? Chase (talk) 23:57, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

I was only following protocol, that was decided against. I'm absolutely fine with the current display of names, your suggestion is completely opinion based and non-conforming to standard rules and practices. I've said my peace on the matter, I'll be wait for a consensus now. LLArrow (talk) 00:26, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Here's my two cents for what it's worth. I think it's obvious that the person named Shelby Miller is the real person and the person with re-enactor by the name is the person replaying their experiences within the documentary. If that's not enough then we should all collectively figure out a way to find a descriptor that makes that division clear. But for what it's worth I find it to be very clear who the real person is and who the reenactor is based on what's there now. TedEskey (talk) 9:40, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

I appreciate your detailed response, but it didn't really speak to Chase's proposition. They want to create two separate columns distinguishing actors parts, and they are seeking consensus. I'm against it because it goes against rules and practices, and aesthetically oliderates the status quo of the series. LLArrow (talk) 02:13, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

For cast and characters and the "issue" of reenactors I still this idea is the most functional without being too distracting and damaging to the article.

New "Cast and characters" section idea

Main Kathy Bates1 Sarah Paulson as Shelby Miller2 Cuba Gooding Jr. as Matt Miller3 Lily Rabe as Shelby Miller André Holland as Matt Miller Denis O'Hare as Dr. Elias Cunningham4 Wes Bentley5 Evan Peters Cheyenne Jackson Angela Bassett as Lee6 Special guest stars Lady Gaga Guest stars Adina Porter as Lee Finn Wittrock Matt Bomer Leslie Jordan Jacob Artist ^1 Kathy Bates played an actor reenacting the part of a character. ^2 Sarah Paulson played an actor reenacting the part of Shelby Miller. ^3 Cuba Gooding Jr. played an actor reenacting the part of Matt Miller. ^4 Denis O'Hare played an actor reenacting the part of Dr. Elias Cunningham. ^5 KWes Bentley played an actor reenacting the part of a character. ^6 Angela Bassett played an actor reenacting the part of Lee.

Kelege (talk) 05:18, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

I love the idea, count me in. C'mon guys, let your opinion be known about this option, so we can squash it. LLArrow (talk) 05:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I think its a brilliant way of putting the feuds aside and representing this weird scenario we have. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 08:13, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Sorry but I just don't support this idea. From what I can gather, it seems all of the main cast besides Rabe and Holland will be playing the reenactment actors, and having notes for every single one of them is just a bit too much I think. I fully support the (reenactor) or the subgroupings of ====Reenactors====. Another possible idea I'd support would be keeping the notes, but instead putting them for Rabe, Holland, and Porter. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 10:19, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah initially the concept (see above) was just for those who had conflicting characters (the ones who were in the interview) because everyone in the "main" story would be technically reenactors. I was just replacing every "(reenactor)" with a note, but idealistically you don't need a statement that they're a reeneactor if they're the single version of that character. The note layout is just a primary means to differentiate between the same-name characters to prevent confusion to the reader. Kelege (talk) 10:40, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

I think adding the note for the interviewee characters is fine. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 10:50, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

I think the current format and this suggestion are both acceptable. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 16:19, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

I like the current one better than this, to me it;s overly complicated for such a small issue. Adding five or more lines of notes for one single issue seems over bearing to me. Chase (talk) 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

The idea of only denoting Rabe and Holland as the characters in an unusual circumstance, works for me. However, there should be a note stating the rest of the actors portray reenactors. LLArrow (talk) 21:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

User:LLArrow; Would you mind showing an example of what you mean, I kinda like the idea, but want to see your exact interpertation. Chase (talk) 21:55, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

New "Cast and characters II" section idea

Main1 Kathy Bates Sarah Paulson as Shelby Miller Cuba Gooding Jr. as Matt Miller Lily Rabe as Shelby Miller André Holland as Matt Miller Denis O'Hare as Dr. Elias Cunningham Wes Bentley Evan Peters Cheyenne Jackson Angela Bassett as Lee Special guest stars Lady Gaga Guest stars Adina Porter as Lee Finn Wittrock Matt Bomer Leslie Jordan Jacob Artist ^1 All principal cast portrays My Roanoke Nightmare reenactors, save for Rabe And Holland.

A mock-up of my idea as requested. I think this allows for the simplest transition, and allows for evolution as the series unfolds. According to the most recent interview given by Murphy and Falchuk, the series will take a major shift in "Chapter 6" (we could have the same actors playing a plethora of characters this season, which is going to make this system tricky to maintain). That being said, I think, for the time being, this is our best means of display. We'll cross that other bridge... LLArrow (talk) 22:06, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I liked the idea, but don't like how it was implemented. I think a version of that would be good, but that one is still confusing. Chase (talk) 22:12, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Because I was asked to give my opinion on this matter, I fully support the latest idea noted above. The single notation, I think, seems the best route to go, at this point in the season. endalecomplex (contributions) • (talk) 00:51, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Do we really need "(reenactor)" after everyone in the story? Isn't the point of it to differentiate between the same-name characters? I really think it should only be used for the 3 being interviewed at this point otherwise the whole cast section is going to be flooded with it. It's be smarter to to the reverse of it and have (interviewee) or something or rather. Using LLArrow's recent suggestion above will prevent this issue, so I fully support it. Kelege (talk) 16:30, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you editors for your candid and detailed opinions. I say it's ready to be implemented. LLArrow (talk) 20:10, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm officially done with this issue. I implemented, IP's and others reverted all, and have regressed the section back to the relic it was. LLArrow (talk) 19:29, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes

The scores for both Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes are only for the first episode (which was the only episodes critics were able to see for the initial reviews. I think we should make this clear (like it is done in numerous other wikipedia articles) that the score is only for the first episode. Joef1234 (talk) 04:20, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

The Behavior on this article and future contributions

User:LLArrow; I am writing to you and lending a hand on this article's talk page because I have gotten the impression that you have a very deep connection with this article. I looked into the article's editing history and have noticed you have a majority of the edits, so I quite understand that feeling. However, I also have seen some instances where other users have felt intimidated by your reverting of their edits and I hope this isn't done intentionally, but to some editors, it might have an effect that is lasting and will not improve Wikipedia and will discourage new editors from wanting to help out on this article of fear of being called names and possibly being attacked for trying to contribute. I have also seen other editors adding information to the page that is not helpful, so I understand where you are coming from when reverted those editors, but when looking at the history of the page, those are few to none, interestingly enough. I just wanting to start a conversation on how we can move forward and improve this article and Wikipedia as a whole, instead of continuing this perceived behavior that is counter-productive. Thank you. Chase (talk) 18:01, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

If you wanted to start a discussion with me concerning any issue you would have done so on my Talk page. This is public crucifixion, something you and I, and any one with half brain, are well aware of. If you wish to discuss any matter with me, I'll be happy to engage with you on my page, I will not engage in a public farce. Gooday, LLArrow (talk) 03:39, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

LLArrow Actually, the guidelines state that I must address the user on the talk page of the article that I believe the user to be expressing signs of WP:Ownership. "An editor who appears to assume ownership of an article should be approached on the article's talk page with a descriptive header informing readers about the topic." So this is what I have done and the page where the dispute is happening is absolutely the appropriate venue for this to take place. . Chase (talk) 04:20, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm utterly finished with you. You want a knock-out fight, I'll put one up. I have addressed the ownership issue time and time again. Good luck getting any respectable editor/admin to believe your (wah-wah-boo-boo) claim. We both know, you're no angel editor, when the spotlight is on prepare for all to be seen... LLArrow (talk) 04:27, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

LLArrow I am not sure what you have against me, or any editor who tries to add anything for that matter, but I am trying to come to some sort of resolution and talk with you about how to improve Wikipedia. I am trying to fix something I have seen with you and other editors. If you are not willing to have a conversation about it or do not think you have done anything wrong, then I will have to seek out other means to try to resolve this, which is not something I want to do, but I can not stand by and watch what I have noticed happening on this article. I may well be wrong on the issue, but it is better to discuss matters than to not. Attacking editors who try to talk to you about these issues do not help anything Chase (talk) 04:34, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

LLArrow I wanted to continue this conversation because you are now available. So I am unclosing this because things seem to still need attention. Chase (talk) 19:55, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Pretty sure that's not allowed, and I know it's a waste of time. I have absolutely nothing to say to you. Anything I'd say would just be reprimanded and disregarded. Stop tagging me in every post. Go bother someone else. LLArrow (talk) 20:01, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

LLArrow; So you have no intention of mending a bridge with another user and trying to talk about the issues each other are having? Just so I can be clear. Chase (talk) 20:05, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

The only issue I have is you and your incessant nagging. I mend bridges with productive and well-intentioned editors. You are a out for yourself, everyone else be damned. Ask me again when you change your editorial frame-of-mind. As far as I'm concerned, end of discussion. LLArrow (talk) 20:13, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

I am out for myself, but am helping other users by not being steam-rolled by you? Yeah, that makes since. Chase (talk) 20:15, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Conveniently, it's only users that share in your opinions that you assist. Hmmm... LLArrow (talk) 20:17, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

That is actually not true. I keep my opinion out of the decision to revert your reverts and have only done it when I notice you saying "non-consensus change" when you yourself made the non-consensus change in the first place, so you revert an editor that changes your change, that you don't like. This is not how consensus works. I have observed that you do not have a very open mind, and are not willing to come to some sort of agreement with any editor and when consensus is establish, you threaten to challenge it in the future. Chase (talk) 20:22, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

I bet you've observed a great deal, all of it tinged in your bias perspective. People with something on their face are usually the last to know. I'm not going to sit here and debate this tedious indignation. I suggest you open your mind to oppression, because that is exactly what your attitude will derive on this site. I am the first of many. LLArrow (talk) 20:29, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

I have been on wikipedia for 4+ years, you are the only person I have had this level of conflict with and seen this type of behavior before. Chase (talk) 20:32, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

If that is to be believed, I am quite envious of your experience and covet it. People/editors like me are not born, they're made, over the course of many a tumbles, down many a thistle-and-bramble coated rabbit holes. Like it or not, I'm the seeded warden of my own ideology, that befalls all I associate with. In other words, no turning back. LLArrow (talk) 20:40, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Spelling of reenactor/re-enactor

Instead of undoing each other's edits of what one believes is the correct spelling, a discussion should most likely be held and hopefully a consensus is reached. There's enough issue on how to incorporate the word let alone the spelling of it. Despite that I personally believe the correct spelling is without the hyphen ([Merriam-Webster]] recognizes it as "reenact" http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reenactor), we are creating an article on the show and what the show wants to portray should also be taken into account. Kelege (talk) 15:30, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

I say throw logistics to the wind and reflect exactly what the show dictates, and that is "re-enactors". That's my say. LLArrow (talk) 22:30, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Check out [2] and [3]. Both Re-enactor and Reenactor are correct. This dictionary doesn't have Reenactor, so I will use this as an example. If you use the hyphen, you are entering into British English, if you don't, it becomes American English. As it is an American television show, we should use the American English version. Chase (talk) 23:27, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

I fully agree with your fact of it being am American show so we should use American English, but the argument could be made that it's an American show that intentionally used British English. As I've said, I prefer the American English version but the show's intent could still be an issue.... For me it's an American show set in America, so I'll be presumptuous in saying that it was probably a simple mistake due to lack of knowledge of the editing team. I vote for "reenactment." Kelege (talk) 11:58, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

I can't remember off the top of my head as I've only watched each episode once so far but does it say anywhere before/during the reenactment scenes that they are that and if so what's the spelling of it? I feel like the spelling should reflect what's on the show. Brocicle (talk) 12:11, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

In episode 2 the series uses "dramatic re-enactment" just after the preview of the prior episode and leading in to the current at the 52-second mark. Kelege (talk) 12:35, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

So we have our decision, let's implement it and put this issue to bed. LLArrow (talk) 19:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

If we have consensus I agree it should be changed. Brocicle (talk) 09:01, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

I also support "reenactment" per my reasons above. Chase (talk) 13:37, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Then we're in gridlock. There's three editors for "(re-enactment)" and two for "(reenactment)", not enough support for either. I don't see any other editors hopping on this ship, since it is so gasly arbitrary. LLArrow (talk) 19:40, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

I am not seeing the third person for "re-enactment", could you show me? Chase (talk) 19:44, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello. The show says re-enact, so this page should too. Very simple. Tiller54 (talk) 22:24, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Before I can even respond to a passive-aggressive query, more common sense prevails. Halleluiah. LLArrow (talk) 23:04, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm happy to revert my position on "reenactment" for "re-enactment" if it solves this issue. It's too trivial of an issue to keep it going. Kelege (talk) 08:26, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

That's what you call "working together for a common goal". Good-on-you Kelege. And that is consensus. LLArrow (talk) 20:07, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

I will support "re-enactment" also. LLArrow we need to use your version of the Cast and characters also. Chase (talk) 20:09, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

New "Cast and characters III" section idea

Main Kathy Bates Sarah Paulson as Shelby Miller Cuba Gooding Jr. as Matt Miller Lily Rabe as Shelby Miller1 André Holland as Matt Miller1 Denis O'Hare as Dr. Elias Cunningham Wes Bentley Evan Peters Cheyenne Jackson Angela Bassett as Lee Special guest stars Lady Gaga Guest stars Adina Porter as Lee1 Finn Wittrock Matt Bomer Leslie Jordan Jacob Artist ^1 Rabe, Holland, and Porter act as the real people portrayed in the My Roanoke Nightmare re-enactment.

However, I prefer something like this. Maybe a slight word change. Chase (talk) 20:14, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Change what you will, but I believe you should wait for another editor to agree with this version, since it was not the version agreed upon. LLArrow (talk) 20:22, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Nothing was agreed upon to implement. I think you are confusing that with some people agreeing with your idea. You should have waited until more people commented. It was a little premature. Chase (talk) 20:26, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Then revert my edit, and let's sit here another week or two, deliberating the smallest, most inconsequential of details until the cows come home. LLArrow (talk) 20:33, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

I will not personally revert it, but think it still needs some discussion because of how confusing it still is. Especially the word choice. e.i., (save). Some people won't find that clear. Chase (talk) 20:35, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

By "some" you must be referring to the uneducated. Wikipedia does dumb down it's content to fit into any one person's grammatically-limited purview. LLArrow (talk) 20:42, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

That was a bit rude and uncalled for. I was talking about more common people that do not have an expert degree in grammar. Chase (talk) 20:45, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Reply was far from rude, and was entirely appropriate given your comment. The word "save" is hardly a Scripps National Spelling Bee winner. Wikipedia is to strive for greater articles, that challenge people to use their vocabulary and intellectuality, not settle for less, to reach the lacking few. LLArrow (talk) 20:51, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

I agree with the version LLArrow implemented. Looks much neater than having "re-enactor" written everywhere. Brocicle (talk) 08:16, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Tried to implement the change was nearly immediately reverted. Can't do it on my own. LLArrow (talk) 07:59, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Cast Images

Cast images must me stricken from the article until all principal actors have made an appearance, the status quo since the first season. It is far too early to be able to tell who is of significance to the greater plot of the season, not to mention the order they're in now violates WP:OPINION and WP:ORIGINAL. LLArrow (talk) 03:42, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

@LLArrow: Careful. That's four times in 24 hours you've removed the images; a violation of 3RR, as I'm sure you're aware. Alex|The|Whovian^? 04:09, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I'm well aware, Alex. Thank you though. You never fail to bring just tad bit more sunshine into my day. Ta ta <3, LLArrow (talk) 04:21, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I also notified LLArrow on their talk page. Also, LLArrow; Please refer to the section above, where I am clearly addressing you. Chase (talk) 04:14, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm done head-butting on both issues, it's high time someone else came in here an inforced regulation. Peace out. LLArrow (talk) 04:19, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Photo of Cuba Gooding Jr

LLArrow, I recently uploaded a photo of Cuba Gooding Jr in the cast section, alongside Paulson and Bassett. You reverted it almost immediately, saying your reason was "the most recent photo should be used". The photograph I posted and the previous one were taken less than 12 months apart, and Gooding is exactly the same in appearance in both. I would understand if it were Paulson, or someone who frequently changes their look, but Gooding still looks the same as he did five years ago. The reason I added the new photo is there is a less busy background and Gooding appears alone (as opposed to the other photo where a portion of a womans face is in the shot). It just looks more professional. I've reverted the edit YellowingMellowing (talk) 20:21, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Every reason you just stated is exactly why that photo will not be used. Using cast photos is not advised, but if they are used they must be most current likness. It has nothing to to with what any one user deems "more professional". Sorry, but the world doesn't bend to our whims. LLArrow (talk) 21:10, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

YellowingMellowing; Per LLArrow and also, the photo you added is of lesser quality to the one originally on there. Chase (talk) 21:56, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Chase; thank you, sorry about that and I'll remember it in future, thanks for talking to me without being condescending, Wiki needs more editors like you :) YellowingMellowing (talk) 17:51, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Not an inch of condescension, just truth tellin'. Oh, and Wikipedia needs more editors that follow the rules. LLArrow (talk) 19:37, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

What Wikipedia needs is less people that "tell it like it is" or "tell the truth" (i.e. are condescending and rude, like you), and more users who encourage and guide others nicely. That's how I've always learned things in real life and I can guarantee you myself and others would be more willing to comply with you, LLArrow, if you spoke to people with dignity rather than speaking to them like some kind of animal in a barn. Besides, no names were mentioned, I was only telling Chase how I was grateful, but if the shoe fits. I don't wish to fight with anyone because I'm a new editor, but reading back through some of your comments, you can be quite nasty. If I do something wrong, tell me without the condescension please, or I will not take your opinion into consideration. That's how the world works. Have a nice day. YellowingMellowing (talk) 21:39, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Glad to hear you can't deal with the real word, because that means you won't last long around these parts. I've edited Wikipedia for years, I was once a goody-two-shoes editor. People have grown more insipid and ignorant as time marches on, ruffling feathers along the way. At this point feathers have been completely blown off. This is the real world. No one holds your hand, telling you everything's going to be all right. It's not. Good luck, LLArrow (talk) 23:01, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

In the "real world" people tend to hate and avoid those who talk down to them like a child. I'll follow the rules, I don't want anyone to hold my hand, I'm asking for simple respect, not being talked to like a four year old, you know? I really don't care what sort of editor you were because you're not me and it's in the past anyway. I wont engage with you at all if you speak to me the way you did the first time. I don't want to further this anymore, just letting you know how I feel, and that you'll catch more flies with honey than vinegar, maybe there's a reason you seem to be the common denominator when it comes to arguments around here. YellowingMellowing (talk) 06:59, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Maybe there's a reason every editor I've ever encountered on Wikipedia with your mindframe have quickly decided editing is not for them. As I said, good luck. LLArrow (talk) 20:05, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Doesn't anyone see the talk header and its guidelines above? It's not there for show. — Wyliepedia 08:28, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Be that as it may, it still happens on nearly every single Talk page. Unless some well-to-do admin decides to go around enforcing, I don't see it coming to an end any time soon. LLArrow (talk) 08:41, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

This section is about Cuba Gooding Jr's photo in the article. This page is a talk page to improve the article. If anyone wishes to fight and be pugilistic to one another, I suggest taking it to your personal talk pages to do so. There's no need to flood this talk page or any other article's talk page with trivial fights and insults. Please remember that Wikipedia is not a battleground. Kelege (talk) 09:13, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

There's also such a thing as a Wikibreak that does wonders for Wikignomes. — Wyliepedia 09:28, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Aw, thanks you guys. I feel so much more enlightened to re-learn things I've known since my editorial debut. Maybe if I sit back, and really concentrate, I'll have an epiphanie and everything will just... work out. Thank you so much. LLArrow (talk) 19:24, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 October 2016

The first paragraph contains incorrect information. The Millers do not relocate to Roanoke Island, North Carolina. They are inland, not on the Outer Banks. 68.173.11.9 (talk) 18:47, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:04, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 October 2016

186.215.247.158 (talk) 05:19, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Please, put Lady Gaga in the part of "Starring" at the side.

Why would we do that when the information is utterly erroneous?. Wikipedia is a place of fact. LLArrow (talk) 06:45, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

And now for the good cop. Welcome, IP editor. Lady Gaga has not been credited in this season as starring. However, if you have a source that states otherwise, we would be more than willing to take a look at it. Hope you understand! Alex|The|Whovian^? 07:31, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello!, the reason Gaga is not listed in the "Starring" is because she is credited as a "special guest star" in the credits at the end. As for now the main cast (that appear in the end credits as the "main" cast) are Evan, Kathy, Denis, André, Cuba, Sarah, Lily, Cheyenne and Angela. If opening credits are included (and I've heard vague rumours that they will premier during episode 6), they will most likely have the above cast named during the credits, but if Gaga is included, we will absolutely add her to the list on the article. If no opening credits appear during the season, the main cast will most likely stay the same. YellowingMellowing (talk) 22:24, 10 October 2016 (UTC)