Jump to content

Talk:Premiere (The O.C.)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articlePremiere (The O.C.) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 5, 2009.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 22, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
October 25, 2008Good article nomineeListed
February 11, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
March 15, 2009Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Episode name?

[edit]

Isn't this episode called 'Pilot'? Not 'Premiere'!? --Ryan2807 17:26 12 August 2006 (UTC)

The O.C. webite calls it "Premiere" and thats the most offial source i know of so it should be called "Premiere" Matthew Fenton (Talk | Contribs) 17:55, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not to split hairs but aren't all The O.C. episode titles have THE before it.... so it would be The Pilot or The Premiere? I think the DVD lists it as The Pilot or The O.C.Moonraker0022 (talk) 05:39, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is this what Wikipedia has come to?

[edit]

In depth analysis of crummy TV shows? Who writes this stuff - Network TV marketeers? 24.74.143.190 (talk) 02:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)sbrundle[reply]

Almost any article that has passed through a featured article candidacy is fair game for the main page. I can assure you that the primary contributor was not a POV-pushing editor. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:18, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hilarious. Hopefully today's FA will be back with more computer games shortly to appeal to Wikipedia's core customer base 86.164.173.243 (talk) 03:06, 5 August 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Wikipedia's TFAs are not picked on what might appeal to certain users. The Featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs), tries to make sure that FAs picked over a given period of time vary in subject. It just happens to be that due to systemic bias that we have a large number of video game and media-related FAs. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:18, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is such a joke. No real encyclopedia would waste the ink printing an article about "The O.C.", much less have articles on every episode and then feature one of them. If I really wanted to know all about Ryan's brother crashing a car then I'd watch the actually episode. I just hope this whole fad ends soon, it's ruining the Internet. --64.180.245.119 (talk) 05:41, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As an internet-based encyclopedia, Wikipedia has no ink to waste. As such, editors are free to write about many more topics than traditional encyclopedias. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 07:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Full disclosure: I'm only on this page because I wanted to see if there was an argument about this being FA. I thank the Wikilord that you whiners came through for me. If you're standard of what WP should limit itself to ("...no real encyclopedia...") is that the spread of knowledge should be confined based on the amount of a finite resource ("...would waste the ink..."), then I'm going to conclude you don't have the most thought-out points of view. "I'd love to tell my wife the house is on fire, but no real hero would waste the cell phone minutes." See? I can take this shit way too seriously too! 98.239.166.251 (talk) 09:05, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I confess that I am only on this page to read these arguments too. Because of my disabilities (primarily mental but also physical) and age I am only allowed access to the internet for a very brief period each day. What I look at is closely supervised and recorded by my carer (today: Alison). It is therefore important to me that the Wikipedia home page / FA covers topics that are of interest to me. Please can those selecting Today's FA take into account my needs by featuring more articles about computer games (particularly play station compatible), Family Guy and The Simpsons. Articles about historical events and characters apparently make me "behave inappropriately" (ie I once hit the guy I share a room with whilst reading about the use of barbed wire during the American Civil War), as does anything scientific, or music or culture related. Thank you for your consideration. 86.164.173.243 (talk) 08:29, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, we do not put articles of a certain subject on (or keep articles off) the front page because a certain person wants them to be there. TFAs are determined by the Featured article director, User:Raul654. Some are selected via a points system, which you can see at WP:TFAR. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:03, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I like about Wikipedia: it has articles on subjects that most other encyclopedias would bother/dare to cover. Where else would you find a comprehensive treatment of Gropecunt Lane or Toilets in Japan? Dabomb87 (talk) 13:29, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. I actually take pride in improving articles that nobody gives a damn about because they're more special. Look at how many of these mainstream and important topics are start class. Spiderone (talk) 16:21, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • We cannot force editors to write about things they aren't interested in - some people just happened to be interested in TV shows. This doesn't mean we don't create good articles about science, or the law, for example. If you've got a problem with the large number of brilliant articles on TV shows outweighing the number of articles on more important things, the best advice I can give is to step in and help out. Ironholds (talk) 15:02, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Premiere (The O.C.). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:17, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Premiere (The O.C.). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:13, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Premiere (The O.C.). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:30, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Premiere (The O.C.). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:13, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Premiere_(The_O.C.)&oldid=1204148153"