Talk:Mad Men/Archives/2023/11
Appearance
This is an archive of past discussions about Mad Men. 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. |
Cast Members
Alison Brie who plays Pete Campbell, a lead on the series' wife who is in 38 episodes deserves to be in the Mad Men cast section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The One I Left (talk • contribs) 16:45, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
- She was never a series regular. Episode count or implied importance does not factor into who is listed in the infobox. She was always credited as a guest star. Drovethrughosts (talk) 16:48, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
- A listing in the show's credits is only one point of view about what's notable enough for inclusion -- and it's only a primary source at that. I think it might not even be "reliable" because who's a "guest star" and who's whatever is affected by factors unrelated to who's "main" or germane to the tales being told. I would say that relying only on that single primary source has caused the inclusion of some characters who were less "main" than Pete's wife on both objective and subjective measures.
- It's secondary sources that are used to establish notability. She was attractive, she played a character that illustrated some of the shows "themes", and her appearance was reasonably frequent. I for one remember her for that. If there are weighty-enough secondary source(s) speaking of her along those lines (or some such), I think that could justify inclusion. Think "Thelma Lou" from The Andy Griffith Show. Both shows were all about a wide range of differing characters, all of whom interacted and contributed significantly to the themes and structures and big picture of the stories we enjoyed. 142.105.159.178 (talk) 02:07, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
- It follows the guidelines at MOS:TVCAST; every TV series article follows these guidelines. If the article had a list of recurring characters, that's where Brie's character would be listed. But, as it stands, the characters section is already very long. Realistically, the character descriptions on the main page should be much more concise, because List of Mad Men characters exists for more in depth information. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:28, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
- I was focusing mostly on your comment "She was always credited as a guest star." which seemed to imply that inclusion is based only on one source (that which did the crediting). Maybe you didn't mean to say that. I do see that MOS:TVCAST does a lot of emphasizing of notability guidelines which would mean that it's editors (us) who decide. So we probably agree there. I have no opinion about how notable a character should be for inclusion, except that currently the list includes some who are probably not as notable as the "Pete's wife" character. So, excluding "Pete's wife" would be inconsistent with the (low) bar established by the list as it exists now. 142.105.159.178 (talk) 03:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- No, that's exactly what I mean. The crediting is all that matters when it comes to determining whether someone is a "main" character or not. From MOS:TVCAST:
Please keep in mind that though "main" cast members are determined by the series producers (not by popularity, screen time, or episode count).
The character is indeed notable, I'm not deny that, but she was a recurring character, not part of the credited series regular cast. Because the current list is very long, it only includes actors that were credited as series regulars, not any guest stars. So, again, the descriptions would have to be significantly trimmed for there to be room to create a section for notable recurring characters, which would then include Brie's character of Trudy. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:37, 25 February 2022 (UTC)- I'm not worried so much about who's actually on what list. I just think the answer isn't so absolute as you make it out to be. That is, I felt some notes of absolutism in your initial comment, which you used to squelch the inclusion a character that might actually be includable. My apologies, that ruffled my feathers a bit giving me a large part of my motive to initially respond. But, in responding, I've researched, and I think that:
1) Inclusion on such lists is up to the editors' interpretations of reliable secondary sources. MOS:TVCAST goes on and on about notability guidelines, which are all about secondary sources.
2) I think it is proper that what's "main" is not determined by popularity, screen time, or episode count. But, it's wrong for MOS:TVCAST to give the idea that it's determined (only) by producers because that's in conflict with more general guidelines. Thus, that error should be ignored.
3) If secondary sources are lacking, producers' lists are a reasonable starting place, but they're not the be-all end-all answer.
4) The credits are a primary source.
5) Primary sources are not what determines includability (in an article or on any list). (Unless the article is about the primary source itself).
6) Primary sources are generally only worth anything for the verification of objective facts about things already determined to be includable.
7) Who's "main" is a subjective thing. Show credits, while seemingly authoritative, are subject to spurious factors like actors negotiations about "top billing", etc.. Those factors are unrelated to which characters might be considered "main". Those factors about actors make it unreliable for supporting something subjective about characters.
Still, it's not really that important to me. I'm just pleased to have had the opportunity to think about it. If you have a rebuttal, please make it. I'm going to move on to other things. :-) 142.105.159.178 (talk) 03:46, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not worried so much about who's actually on what list. I just think the answer isn't so absolute as you make it out to be. That is, I felt some notes of absolutism in your initial comment, which you used to squelch the inclusion a character that might actually be includable. My apologies, that ruffled my feathers a bit giving me a large part of my motive to initially respond. But, in responding, I've researched, and I think that:
- No, that's exactly what I mean. The crediting is all that matters when it comes to determining whether someone is a "main" character or not. From MOS:TVCAST:
- I was focusing mostly on your comment "She was always credited as a guest star." which seemed to imply that inclusion is based only on one source (that which did the crediting). Maybe you didn't mean to say that. I do see that MOS:TVCAST does a lot of emphasizing of notability guidelines which would mean that it's editors (us) who decide. So we probably agree there. I have no opinion about how notable a character should be for inclusion, except that currently the list includes some who are probably not as notable as the "Pete's wife" character. So, excluding "Pete's wife" would be inconsistent with the (low) bar established by the list as it exists now. 142.105.159.178 (talk) 03:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- It follows the guidelines at MOS:TVCAST; every TV series article follows these guidelines. If the article had a list of recurring characters, that's where Brie's character would be listed. But, as it stands, the characters section is already very long. Realistically, the character descriptions on the main page should be much more concise, because List of Mad Men characters exists for more in depth information. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:28, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
Assertion in Main Section
Regarding the term "Mad Men" it states "(In reality, the only documented use of the phrase prior to the series may have been in the late-1950s writings of James Kelly, an advertising executive and writer.)" However, the source cited does not claim this was the only usage of the term prior to the series but rather during the 1950s. Between the 1950s and the run of the series, I believe the term was in wider usage. I'm changing accordingly. Bridgecross (talk) 14:07, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
- When was it used before the series ran? Korny O'Near (talk) 16:52, 13 July 2020 (UTC)