Talk:Babylon Berlin
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 | You can help expand this article with text translated from the corresponding article in German. Click [show] for important translation instructions.
|
Episode list?
[edit]No list of episodes at all? 05:05, 5 March 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.81.249.168 (talk)
Cast and characters
[edit]There are way too many spoilers in the Cast and characters section. Description should be shorter and should not contain spoilers, especially things that happen in season 2. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nano Ruler (talk • contribs) 13:03, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Medium claim re: lack of Nazis
[edit]There has been some debate on this page about the reliability of a Medium.com article to reinforce a claim about the show. While it is verifiable, Medium is a website for self-publishing--with no editorial oversight. Wikipedia's policy on self-published sources is clear, and it is not acceptable in this case to use an SPS to reinforce a point of view that lends undue weight to the perspective of a writer. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 16:58, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Pinging those involved: Walter Görlitz, Kbrose.
- I checked WP:RSN and it indicated what Etzedek24 stated: we should not use a self-published source in this way. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:07, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
season 3 premiere on Sky
[edit]Please urgently fix: the lead claims the premiere is on Sky Deutschland. The body claims "Germany and the UK on Sky UK". Which is it? I reverted these additions but they were put back in place unchanged even when challenged. The Variety source is ambiguous (it talks only about "Sky"). Could it be the reporter got it wrong? Or the editor misinterpreted the source? Please add a source that firmly establishes which network premieres this show.
CapnZapp (talk) 11:26, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
'acute', or 'accurate'?
[edit]Dear fellow editors,
In the Critical reception section, the quote from German historian Thomas Weber (3rd paragraph) stated:
"From a historical perspective, the series is very acute in showing how Weimar Democracy was under attack both from the Communist Left, as well as by traditional Conservatives, in a kind of unholy alliance."
I emphasised acute in bold font, but it would appear that this might be a translation error, or a typo of the word accurate, and I have therefore corrected it as a typo. If anyone has subscription access to the online source, please would you have a look, to have it confirmed one way or the other? Thank you very much.
With kind regards; Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(become old-fashioned!) 21:44, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
- Agree that it's likely a typo. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:10, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
| “ | From an historical perspective the series is very acute in showing how Weimar democracy was under attack both from the communist left, as well as by traditional conservatives, in a kind of unholy alliance," says Thomas Weber, a German historian not involved with the show... | ” |
- No, I don't have a subscription, but when you google article headlines, sites often let in visitors from google. In this case, that didn't help but it explains the following: by googling the headline I found a Reddit bot that had summarized the article, including the quote. Obviously I understand the concern since it isn't idiomatic English, but then again, Weber isn't a native speaker. I see no reason to change the original editor's inclusion. CapnZapp (talk) 10:10, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, CapnZapp; I'll change it back and add the {{sic}} template, to save someone else from being puzzled by it, as it is a somewhat unusual occurrence of the word acute, even though one of its meanings is:
having or showing a perceptive understanding or insight; shrewd. "an acute awareness of changing fashions"
. If it makes perfect sense to another editor, however, then the template can obviously be removed later. Thank you also for explaining how you found the quote; I'll try that in future. - With kind regards; Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(become old-fashioned!) 10:56, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, CapnZapp; I'll change it back and add the {{sic}} template, to save someone else from being puzzled by it, as it is a somewhat unusual occurrence of the word acute, even though one of its meanings is:
- No, I don't have a subscription, but when you google article headlines, sites often let in visitors from google. In this case, that didn't help but it explains the following: by googling the headline I found a Reddit bot that had summarized the article, including the quote. Obviously I understand the concern since it isn't idiomatic English, but then again, Weber isn't a native speaker. I see no reason to change the original editor's inclusion. CapnZapp (talk) 10:10, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
No unified spelling
[edit]I just noticed that an editor changed "US" to "U.S.", but according to MOS:US, both are acceptable with the former more common in British English and the latter in American. I then looked for signs of which was used in the article and both variants are used, however we should settle on one. The article developed without any words that had variant spellings until 2018-09-13, when @Alheller: added "neighborhoods". Recent plot writers have used British spelling though, and since the date format is dmy, I suggest adopting British spelling. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:40, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- No comment. I will apply British spelling. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:54, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
No Season 4 in USA, others
[edit]Nothing about Season 4 being blocked in USA (and other places). Deafening silence in media about why that is? Nothing about a business dispute, or something offended someone? Why does no-one know the reason for the block? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.188.177.247 (talk) 01:22, 20 March 2024 (UTC)