Talk:Critical Role/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions about Critical Role. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 March 2021 and 15 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Brenhaze21.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Words or numerals for campaigns? (also "Campaign X" vs "campaign x")

NO CONSENSUS

The suggested next step in June 2021 was a RfC in order to get a resolution. Sariel Xilo (talk) 18:44, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

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.

A good point was raised during the "failed" RfC on moving the campaigns to different article titles; which was that the reliable sources tend to capitalise "Campaign" and use a numeral when referring to the first and second campaigns.

TV shows seem to use Show Name (season X) (where X is a numeral). Whilst MOS:SPELL09 says numbers 0-9 should ideally be spelled out in prose; WP:V and WP:COMMONNAME says we must reflect sources. The manual of style is a guideline; whereas the other two are policies. All three are trumped by WP:IAR. So, in an attempt to gain local consensus, which way do we want to go?

Uppercase plus numeral - for example "Campaign 1"
Uppercase plus word - for example "Campaign One"
lowercase plus numeral - for example "campaign 1"
lowercase plus word - for example "campaign one"

Please note: this isn't a formal RfC (it's too malformed for a start) but WP:RFCBEFORE and WP:!VOTE are still worth a read. Little pob (talk) 13:56, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

As the person making the cited aforementioned point, I believe that the articles should go toward uppercase with numeral. It's how it's styled on the official channels when referred to as a proper noun: shows page on the website, YouTube channel and in individual video titles, Twitch channel, original Geek and Sundry announcement. Here's some examples of reliable sources doing the same:

PC Gamer interview - "This article covers the events of Critical Role Campaign 2 episode 26 and beyond."
ComicBook.com - "Spoilers from Campaign 2: Episode 94 follows!"
ScreenRant - "Campaign 2 — The Mighty Nein — is still in progress.", "Still, the superior production of Campaign 2 makes it much easier to get into comparatively", "Though many may want to watch all of Campaign 1 before The Legend of Vox Machina premieres on Amazon Prime, or all of Campaign 2 so they can participate in the livestreams..." (As a note, this article also treats "The Mighty Nein" and "Vox Machina" as proper standalone titles for the campaigns, but this is, ime, uncommon.)
CBR - "Fans were first introduced to Artagan as Garmelie the satyr cartoonist in Campaign 1", "In Campaign 2, it's revealed that...", "Another throwback from Campaign 1...", "...a cameo in episode 125 of Campaign 2...", "...met Vox Machina way back in episode 14 of Campaign 1"
Forbes - "Some 373 hours of videos of weekly game play from "Campaign 1" remain available on YouTube", "...one of the most popular story lines from Campaign 1"

I feel there is some argument for, "Critical Role: Campaign 1: Vox Machina" but it's not as common. The television season article naming convention of a lowercase for "season" doesn't really apply because the fact that the article subject is indeed formally and officially titled takes precedence. Many sources get around this question by refusing to ascribe a proper noun or title to either campaign at all, preferring to describe it descriptively, i.e. "the first campaign of Critical Role", but, as in the prior, I think the fact that the official source treats it as "Campaign X" proper noun, and treats them as separate items of narrative rather than seasons, should be weighed most heavily here. ~Cheers, Ten Ton Parasol 16:57, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Well Campaign 2 has ended and there have been no objections to @TenTonParasol:'s suggestion. As such I intend to make the following moves by Sunday:

It's probably best leave working on Draft:Critical Role Campaign 3 until it's officially announced. Little pob (talk) 12:32, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't think those are the right moves. I don't have any real preference regarding capitalisation or numeral use, but I do think we should retain the parentheses. That is, I'd be fine with the status quo of Critical Role (campaign two) or a change to Critical Role (Campaign 2) but don't like Critical Role Campaign 2. While Critical Role campaigns are not the same as individual seasons of TV shows, they are sufficiently similar that we should still aim for consistency with them to the extent that we can. (And yes, I agree that any move to write anything about Campaign 3 at the moment would be severely premature. We should wait not only until it's announced but until it's received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources, not that I expect that to take long.) Lowercaserho (talk) 13:35, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Personally, I feel the move should be to:

This is similar to, say the American Horror Story family of articles, which I think is the closest comparison. ~Cheers, Ten Ton Parasol 13:52, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

That wouldn't be my top choice, but I wouldn't object to it either. Lowercaserho (talk) 14:42, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

I agree with Lowercaserho on a preference for parenthesis. If no parenthesis, then I prefer the colon style over no colon. Sariel Xilo (talk) 15:05, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Don't get me wrong; I actually have a preference for parenthesis retention. However, the sources don't seem to use them. Whilst we do see colons used; the vast majority of the time it seems to be "Critical Role Campaign X", or just "Campaign X", and the argument made for changing to a numeral was that we're not reflecting the sources.

I'm not going to move whilst discussion is active. If more voices are needed, members of WP:TV and WP:D&D projects might be interested in joining the discussion. Little pob (talk) 19:28, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

The parenthesis style is about being consistent within the wider Wikipedia style. Most coverage of TV shows isn't using "Name (season #)" when referring to a specific season. It's often referred to just by "season #" within the context of an article on a show or referred to as "Name season #" in articles comparing shows/seasons. While RS can give us context (ie. Campaign 1 vs Vox Machina), I think the question is really about what Wikipedia style we should use. Sariel Xilo (talk) 20:01, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

The problem with that is that the reason those seasons are treated such is that they're not named entities. "Campaign 1" and "Campaign 2" are the actual formal names of these things, which is different because television seasons aren't formally named "Once Upon A Time Season 4" or "Friday Night Lights Season 2". We CAN always open up an RfC to solicit broader opinion from relevant WikiProjects. Also, that IS a fair point about the colons, for some reason, my memory was the official sources used a colon, but a quick check again shows they don't. ~Cheers, Ten Ton Parasol 21:12, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Looking at different reliable sources, I don't think there's a single consistent style for this. Yes, you definitely see instances where Campaign 2 is capitalised and treated as a proper noun, but you also see a lot of writing just referring to it as just "the second campaign", as a description not a title. There's also some instances of referring to the campaigns as seasons. Furthermore, even when we do see sources caitalising "Campaign" (indicating it's part of the title), it's often not italicised. "Critical Role Campagin 2", for instance (indicating it's not part of the title). In light of all this inconsistency, I think we should largely be free to choose our own prefered style, which should be consistent with what's used throughout the rest of Wikipedia. Lowercaserho (talk) 21:39, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I'm referring to, like, from the company itself. They treat "Campaign 1" and "Campaign 2" as like subtitle names of their shows, in the way that it's like American Horror Story: Coven. I'm suggesting that be taken into account. 00:11, 11 June 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TenTonParasol (talk • contribs)

Even the company itself is inconsistent in its own usage. For instance, [1] has both "Campaign 1" and (in one of the images) "Vox Machina Campaign". Or there's [2] which has "Campaign 2 of Critical Role", "Critical Role Episode 141", and "Critical Role C2E141". I don't think there's enough consistency to truly favour one reading over the other. Regardless, this is veering dangerously close to arguing about the colour of the bikeshed, so I'll bow out of the discussion. I've made my preferences clear and will go along with whatever consensus forms. Lowercaserho (talk) 01:28, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Arbitrary break

OK, there doesn't seem to be any objection to switch to capitalisation and numerals; but consensus is lacking on the three options:

Critical Role (Campaign #) – supported by MOS:TV (a guideline), has precedent with multi-season web series (e.g. Daredevil (season 1))
Critical Role Campaign # – seems to be used by a majority of 3rd party sources when they're using the "full title", which brings WP:COMMONNAME into the mix
Critical Role: Campaign # – used by some 3rd party sources, is occasionally used by official CR sources, has precedent with web series that stand alone within a universe (e.g. Battlestar Galactica: Blood & Chrome)

Beside whether to fully italicise the title or not, have I missed any arguments made above? Are the any options I've missed? Little pob (talk) 12:38, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

I think that's all the major options listed. I feel like an RfC would be the best course of option then? ~Cheers, Ten Ton Parasol 15:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I think RfC makes the most sense. Sariel Xilo (talk) 15:43, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

I'll start an RfC as soon as I find time (not done one before, so want to take time to read though some of the current RfCs). Will probably sandbox a draft, and I'll post back with a link for eyes before taking live. Little pob (talk) 13:02, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Awesome. Thanks for sorting that out. After you post notice of the live RfC, I think we can WP:CLOSE this. Sariel Xilo (talk) 16:10, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

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.

Campaign three

I've created a draft for Campaign three (Draft:Critical Role (campaign three)) so feel free to edit that. I haven't selected a color for the campaign (see MOS:TVOVERVIEW Formatting) so if you have ideas for that or just want to pick a color, please do so. The color will be used in the C3 article & will be used in a couple of tables (see Critical Role#Campaign structure & List of Critical Role episodes#Series overview). Thanks! Sariel Xilo (talk) 19:27, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Took another look at MOS:TVUPCOMING; since they've announced the dates for the first 2 episodes, I've moved the article into mainspace. I picked a random color so feel free to change it. Sariel Xilo (talk) 21:12, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Liam O'Brian's characters

I personally think that not every character is to be included. It should only be the characters that appear in the main campaigns. Even if they come from direct continuations, they're still one-shots and shouldn't be included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.92.185.201 (talk) 23:07, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

They're part of the main narrative continuity, so there's basis to list them. The article makes a clear discernment between non-canon one-shots and one-shots that are part of the main narrative to prevent the list from getting out of control. Just as we list all Exandria Unlimited characters on the basis that they're members of the show's main narrative continuity, Lieve'tel and Derrig should also be listed as Liam's characters. They might be "only" one-shots, but those episodes are considered of the core canon, thus it is an oversight to exclude them. ~Cheers, Ten Ton Parasol 23:29, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

By that logic, we would have to include other characters that the others did for the one-shots. And since we don't want to overflow the article with every one-short character, it's better to stick with the ones who appear in the main campaigns and EU. 208.92.185.201 (talk) 23:45, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

I agree with TenTonParasol that we should include the characters portrayed in the canon one-shots. I also know that @Little pob has been working on a version of the cast list in the same style as List of American Horror Story cast members but I don't think that's out of sandbox yet. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:51, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

I disagree because it'll just overcrowd the article. Even if the one-shots are canon, the cast roster should be simplified and stick with the main campaigns and EU. And the reason why EU is to be included is because of it being continuous like the main three campaigns. 208.92.185.201 (talk) 01:52, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

~~IP editor seems to be arguing that the notability for this article is with the actor, not their character.~~IP editor's argument could be taken further; that the notability within this article is with the actor, not their character I kind of agree with that view point; but favour WP:spinout over deletion. We've not long hit the 50kb page size anyway, so should probably consider some sort of cast/character list article. (NB 50kb is the HTML prose. The "readable" prose is ~29kb, but that ignores any content in list markup.) We'd then have a pared down cast list in this article. Little pob (talk) 13:51, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

I also know that Little pob has been working on a version of the cast list Here's what I've been sandboxing: User:Little pob/List of Critical Role characters Table can be split into main campaign and spin-offs if needed in the future. I've not done the prose sections below the table yet, but it's at a stage where I should probably get some feedback. Little pob (talk) 11:24, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Been working through the list of characters below the cast table, and realise it's probably best to split the draft in to two. The separate articles that are likely to end up at List of Critical Role cast members and Glossary of Critical Role characters. Little pob (talk) 15:29, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

While I like the idea of a list of CR characters, I don't think it'll meet notability for a standalone article (versus a list focused on the cast members that outlines the characters they play). Sariel Xilo (talk) 15:50, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm seeing plenty of sources to meet WP:GNG for a character slanted page. Ultimately though, it'll depend on the final page size of User:Little pob/List of Critical Role characters before I move it to mainspace. Little pob (talk) 18:03, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

ExU and Anjali Bhimani: guest or cast?

Anjali Bhimani is listed as both main cast and a guest player for ExU. I've not gotten round to ExU: Kymal; so I'm not sure which is correct and which needs removing. Little pob (talk) 12:39, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

@Little pob: Bhimani is main for ExU: Kymal but I actually think we should remove ExU from the CR cast list since it has a standalone article now (Exandria Unlimited#Casting). Sariel Xilo (talk) 16:34, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Went ahead and removed ExU (WP:BOLD). Sariel Xilo (talk) 16:40, 9 June 2022 (UTC)