Jump to content

Talk:The George Lucas Talk Show

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Suggestions

[edit]

I saw your ping on the wikiproject talk page. Good job taking the lead on creating a new article and contributing to Wikipedia! What stands out to me as next steps here would be some kind of critical reaction section encapsulating reviews from reliable/reputable sources. This will also help the topic meet the notability requirements for inclusion. You cite some of these already, but tying together a "this is what third parties say about this show" and showing a breadth of significant, third-party coverage is a best practice. A bit lower down the list, but still important, is ensuring the article maintains a neutral point of view -- this is clearly written by someone who's a fan of the show (why else write a Wikipedia article about it?), but the actual content presented to general readers should try to maintain an objective stance -- for example, calling the fundraiser a "success" (unless cited to or quote from a third-party source) is non-neutral, and it'd be sufficient to simply state the fact that it raised $20K. The draft does a good job of linking to relevant other Wikipedia articles and following the manual of style, and that's great! Also, good job prioritizing citations and references -- they're super-critical, and you're already showing that you know how to do that work. This is a great start. --EEMIV (talk) 14:05, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @EEMIV for your response to my articles draft post! I really appreciate the feedback; keeping the language in a neutral tone is going to be the hardest thing about continuing on with this page, because I do have a great affinity towards this show and the people behind it, but I am glad to hear that I have done an acceptable job with what I have so far! Do you think it would be acceptable by adding critical reaction in the 2nd paragraph, which goes into the details of the shows return and successful fundraising? The continual fundraising since their return on May 4th, as well as the guests they have been able to book, has been its biggest draw for critical and advertising of the show from notable publications, so I feel like if I added a new section I may be using the same source citations as I had already done throughout the article; is that common and acceptable? Again, thank you for bearing with me, I am quite new to all this; I'm not even sure if this is the proper way for me to respond to your response!Mcdave mcdougal (talk) 19:32, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

EEMIV, I used the Comedy Bang! Bang! podcast wikipedia page as an example of a Reception section and added three relevant quotes from already cited sources. How am I looking, and thanks for your time!Mcdave mcdougal (talk) 21:51, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mcdave mcdougal, please don't use tagline (book cover) styles for the reception. That makes it reek of blatant advertising. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:38, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AngusWOOF, thank you for helping me avoid that kind of language in my draft yet again! I can't thank you enough for your help and I will continue to thank you unless told otherwise! I edited the Reception section to use prose instead of bullet points, added names and cited the references, found additional quotes and sources, and published the draft as I continue to edit. As I mentioned, most notable publications have only included positive reviews, but the show is absent from sites such as Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes. Should I minimize the Reception section because of its lack of critical analysis, or is it acceptable as it stands? Again, thank you so much for your time! Mcdave mcdougal (talk) 17:32, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Metacritic / Rotten Tomatoes are aggregate sites, so you can just list their stats if relevant. But if you have other newspapers that have reviewed the show you can add those. Also is there a way to indicate how often they do an episode? Or the production of it? Is it like a talk show format with a live guest audience? a podcast? Is it scripted? Do they run a different show / episode every event, or repeat the same theme with multiple performances? If you have news sources that break down how the episodes are produced then you can cite that. For the critics reviews, you can list what they liked and then disliked about the show. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:39, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AngusWOOF thank you so much for your editorial directions! I have included additional information on what you have cited, and published those changes; I left out information on the cost of the show, because it is explained in my edits that the show is broadcast from each individual persons home and thus costs basically $0 for production; let me know if I should expand upon that facet of the program, and once again, thank you for your time! Mcdave mcdougal (talk) 18:42, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Mcdave mcdougal, I thought it was broadcast at the UCB Theatre, that they were renting space out every month / few months or so? I understand now they are remoting but what were they doing before? AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 20:09, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AngusWOOF Ahh, thanks again, I added the information in the first paragraph that it had been performed monthly live on stage at the UCB Theatre, and published those changes. Thank you! Mcdave mcdougal (talk) 20:56, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a way to get some of the details better sourced? There's stuff like "it's now a four-hour weekly show" that needs to be cleaned up, and how much the fundraisers made is not referenced. The guest lists should be trimmed to ones that are referred to by the articles. I also added more Village Voice reference articles above on the talk page that you can use as well. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:47, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also suggesting to add the Air & Space Museum event, the appearances at UCB Los Angeles, and other national stops if any. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:46, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF I have been going through some interviews with Connor, Griffin and Patrick concerning the history of the George Lucas talk show, from its stage show through the current online version; I was wondering how to use this information, where the source is an interview on a youtube link. It seems that most detailed historical information concerning the show may be gathered in this way as opposed to written articles from notable publications, or after now having reached out to them where they agreed to have conversations, my own personal conversations with them. Is there a good way for this information, where i could provide citations with timestamps in youtube interviews, make it to a publishable history for the page? Once again, thank you for your help! Mcdave mcdougal (talk) 04:08, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I'm not sure if its just me or if its something I can do to adjust its search results, but google searching for "george lucas talk show wikipedia" brings me to the talk page instead of the article; I have no idea about this aspect of wikipedia editing, and if it is something that can be altered through wikipedia; was just curious as to the options available if any. Mcdave mcdougal (talk) 04:08, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anguswoof hello again! I have written up a decent sized history section with citations in my sandbox here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mcdave_mcdougal/sandbox, and am having trouble transferring that information over to the article space. I am nervous to do so and was wondering if you could help me? It is information I have gathered from two interviews with the hosts of the show, as well as in my own conversations with Patrick Cotnoir. I'd love to add what I have, but when I try doing so myself I am somehow removing references and citations I would not like to remove! Once again, thank you for your time!

Um, you actually know Cotnoir and people on staff? You might have to declare conflict of interest then for the article. Please read WP:COI The direct interviews, if not published on a third-party website, are probably not usable. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 21:06, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AngusWOOF Oh, no, you misunderstood me. After the initial wikipedia article met publication criteria, I contacted Patric Cotnoir in hopes of gaining more information on the history of the show for parts of the history that I have been working on but unable to find information on in the interviews I had mentioned; I do not personally know him or have any connection to The George Lucas Talk Show besides myself being a fan of the show. I am still trying to understand if the two sites where I found interviews would qualify as citable references: this interview is hosted on the interviewers website: https://www.wearetrashpeople.com/post/615369613400850432/check-out-our-george-lucas-talk-show-watchalong, as well as this interview: http://www.miscastcommentary.com/newsupdates/2020/8/14/the-complete-interview-with-connor-ratliff-and-patrick-cotnoir. Both interviews are the hosts of The George Lucas Talk Show talking to other people I also have no connections with. Thanks for helping me clarify this and try to find notable places to be able to source their historical information from! Mcdave mcdougal (talk) 21:35, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Directly conversing with Cotnoir would be original research, so you wouldn't be able to use the information gathered from the phone / email / text conversation anyway. You can use the We Are Trash People and non-notable interviews that were publicized. Just that the article should not be based mostly on such sources. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 21:47, 16 October 2020 (UTC) updated 21:49, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome, thank you for that clarification so that going forward I know how to source things properly to avoid any COI, I'm glad that we had this back and forth early in my time using Wikipedia to clear that up for any future work I contribute to this or other pages. Thanks again @AngusWOOF! Mcdave mcdougal (talk) 17:56, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:37, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:52, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:21, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:25, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_George_Lucas_Talk_Show&oldid=1209624685"