Entertainment desk
< December 31	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 2 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 1

A door in the TV show The Big Bang Theory

File:The Big Bang Theory Cast.jpg
Caption: Main characters in The Big Bang Theory, the door seen behind them to the right in the picture. (Non-free image linked per WP:NFCC#9. -- ToE 15:33, 29 January 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Behind the sofa in Sheldon's and Leonard's flat, there's a door. Has it ever been shown on the show, where this door leads? Dammråtta (talk) 11:22, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is just based on my increasingly unreliable memory, but I seem to recall that it's a closet door (with Sheldon and/or Leonard having been shown to go in there to fetch some of their "toys"). Deor (talk) 12:07, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Big Bang Theory Wikia[1], it is a small closet. There, you can also read about the different posters which have been hanging on that door at different times, e.g. a movie poster. Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 14:17, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to recall Sheldon getting something out of that closet in the current season. So, yes, it has been opened before. Dismas|^(talk) 18:41, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus data on NCIS Season 13 Page

A while back I noticed that the page for NCIS's Season 13 included the episodes' ratings in Australia. This made no sense as I am an Australian and an avid NCIS fan and I can state with certainty that Season 13 hasn't begun airing here yet. If it had, I would most certainly have been watching it.

While Chanel 10 has been airing NCIS episodes for most weeks since they aired the Season 12 finale, these were all reruns of old episodes.

Wanting to be a helpful Wikipedian, I did what I assumed was the right thing and deleted all the bogus Australian data from the page. This edit was swiftly undone and I was instructed to instead post a complaint on the page's talk page so that someone else would know their supposed to delete the bogus data. So I did this. That was over a month ago and the bogus ratings are STILL listed on the page. Clearly whoever's job it is to delete the bogus data isn't paying attention.

Clearly, this procedure of using the "talk" pages to indicate problems that the staff need to fix with articles doesn't work. Or if it does, it must work very, very slowly. Is there a more quick way to get people to fix the problems that we common users aren't authorized to fix, or do we just have to sit on our hands and bear the long delays? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.183.5 (talk) 15:40, 1 January 2016

It may be that you'll just have to wait. Unfortunately, we have very few people who are willing to devote hours a day to updating data about anything. The talk page may not be closely monitored, but somebody should drop by eventually. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 21:27, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The point being that there is no "staff", only volunteers with no more (and no less) standing than the OP.

The data does have citations, so the data should only be deleted if the citations turn out to be demonstrably false, rather than on the basis of the OP's personal knowledge, as Wikipedia relies on documentary evidence, not "what someone knows".

If the data did not have citations, the OP would have been correct to delete it as un-cited pending the supply of valid citations.

Either way, the data should not be reinstated without unequivocal citations. The discussion and links provided on the Article's Talk page, and the supplied citations themselves, suggest the matter is uncertain, as the citations mention the Show but not the Episode titles being aired. We really need further evidence to decide this one, such as an Autralian TV listing that gives the Episode titles for the dates in question. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.123.25.88 (talk) 04:03, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I say that we should delete the Australian figures. If the series hasn't been shown in Australia yet (and nobody has been able to demonstrate that it has) then the figures are nonsense. There's nothing in the linked citation to show which series the figures apply to or even that they represent the whole of the country - see the Talk:NCIS_(season_13) page. "If you are sure the statement you want to tag is not factual... it may still be appropriate to be bold and simply edit it out of the text (delete it). Be sure to add a suitable edit summary such as "Very doubtful - please do not revert without giving a citation". If the original statement was accurate after all this gives someone the chance to put it back, hopefully with a proper citation this time. It's not as though the Australian figures add much to the article - NCIS is shown in many countries - are we going to quote viewing figures for all of them? Alansplodge (talk) 10:42, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]