Talk:The Amazing Digital Circus

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Can we please remove the "inspired by" section in the infobox?

None of the listed media casts a big enough shadow on the series to deserve being there. Eldomtom2 (talk) 15:45, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's still important to add all info we have to make the article accurate as possible. If the creators claim that TADC has inspiration from more works, Then we should add them. L.R. Luther (talk) 00:19, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you understand the purpose of the infobox. The list of works Gooseworx has cited as inspiration for TADC is in the double digits. Should we add all of them to the infobox?--Eldomtom2 (talk) 16:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, We should add them to make it accurate. I'll start adding the inspirations. L.R. Luther (talk) 17:09, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, you clearly don't understand the purpose of the infobox.--Eldomtom2 (talk) 21:12, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The INFObox was design to tell info about the media. That's what it's for. L.R. Luther (talk) 22:11, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You two need to come to a consensus instead of continuing to edit war. Both of you are flirting with WP:3RR. Personally, I believe the information should be added to the infobox if there is notable coverage. We don't need to add inspiration in the double digits, just what has been covered in reliable sources. GSK (talk • edits) 02:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly, It's important to leave the inspiration there. L.R. Luther (talk) 03:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fundamentally my point is that infoboxes are not the place to list inspirations unless such inspirations cast a massive, massive shadow over the work. The inspirations of The Lord of the Rings are very well documented. But none of them are listed in the infobox.--Eldomtom2 (talk) 10:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We should add that too. Also, The themes of TADC are just like IHNMAIMS L.R. Luther (talk) 16:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the instructions for Template:Infobox television and it says "Inspired by" is only for use when the inspiration is explicitly credited in the show. Case closed, the "inspired by" section is going.--Eldomtom2 (talk) 09:58, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And the creators said that it was based on it. We should add it L.R. Luther (talk) 10:54, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In this case, I agree with @Eldomtom2: IHNMAIMS is not explicitly credited in TADC, and its author is not listed in the show's Special Thanks credits. GSK (talk • edits) 12:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The instructions don't say that it has to be explicitly credited in The Amazing Digital Circus. They only say that it has to be "explicitly credited". Gooseworx has explicitly cited the story as a inspiration. In my interpretation, this rule is just to avoid citing inspirations that sources think the series has (i.e. their interpretations) when the creator hasn't said anything. Here, the creator did confirm it. Skyshiftertalk 12:44, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the instructions wouldn't use the words "explicitly credited" if they just meant "don't add it if you don't have a reliable source", which of course applies to anything in an infobox.--Eldomtom2 (talk) 13:50, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's more than that (again, in my interpretation). Multiple reliable sources could say that a series was inspired by X thing — that doesn't mean that the creator was actually inspired by it. So even if reliable sources said, in their reviews of the series for example, that they felt the series was inspired by X, we could only add it if the creator has explicitly confirmed it, which is the case. But of course I understand different interpretations and this should be discussed further. Skyshiftertalk 15:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Asked about this at WP:VPP and was pointed to this conversation when "inspired by" was added to {{Infobox television}}, which makes it clear that it is only to used for cases where there is an explicit credit in the show itself.--Eldomtom2 (talk) 16:07, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I stand corrected. Skyshiftertalk 16:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When you edit the page via "Visual Editing" It doesn't say anything about the media needing to claim where it's based or inspired by in the credits at all. L.R. Luther (talk) 17:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus needs to be established one way or another because you are flying dangerously close to violating WP:3RR. Looking at the overall discussion here, I personally cannot see a clear consensus for or against that has been established and agreed upon. GSK (talk • edits) 17:42, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The visual editing says otherwise. Again, who makes up these rules? L.R. Luther (talk) 18:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Policy is established via consensus, which you seem entirely unwilling to engage with. Considering your actions here and on the article itself, I have opened a discussion at WP:ANEW. GSK (talk • edits) 18:42, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll check it out. L.R. Luther (talk) 18:48, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 15:16, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
  • ... that Gooseworx's original pitch for The Amazing Digital Circus was more chaotic and silly before becoming deeper and more nuanced?
  • Source: Placido, Dani Di (2023-12-22). "The Amazing Digital Circus Team Talk The Making Of A Viral Hit". Forbes. Archived from the original on May 12, 2024. Retrieved 2024-05-12.
Improved to Good Article status by Skyshifter (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 12 past nominations.

Skyshiftertalk 11:25, 18 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.
Overall: Good to go! Approving ALT4. 🌙Eclipse (talk) (contribs) 11:56, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@LunaEclipse: sorry, I made a mistake. The source for ALT4 says that Goose "hadn't worked a lot with 3D", not that she never had worked with it. My mistake. I've fixed the article accordingly. Skyshiftertalk 23:18, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Approving ALT1 then. 🌙Eclipse (talk) (contribs) 11:23, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What about the other hooks LunaEclipse? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:26, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cartoon Brew is reliable per WP:TOON/R, the hooks cited to Forbes are fine per WP:ABOUTSELF, In The Know should be fine as it is owned by Yahoo (reliable per WP:RSP) and Comics Beat is also reliable (see this discussion). These hooks are also good to go. lunaeclipse (talk) (contribs) 15:01, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Whims" vs. "instructions"

Seeing the discussion in the above section, I believe that "they are subject to Caine's whims" is a more suitable way of phrasing the plot in the header and the synopsis than "they must follow Caine's instructions", since it lines up with the official description on Glitch's website, which reads as follows:

"A woman gets trapped in a crazy virtual world along with five other humans and are now subject to the whims of a wacky AI and their own personal traumas."

Besides that, it helps describe Caine's impulsiveness, and better respects that the characters have a degree of freedom in not going along with him (e.g., Zooble opting to prepare the funeral instead of going on the adventure in episode 2).

If there are better ways of putting it, what would you suggest? User:SubZeroSilver (talk) 03:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Animators

The complete list of animators seems too long for the infobox, and I would like to remove it. According to H:IB, infoboxes should be concise and not contain long bodies of text. Meanwhile, lead animator Kevin Temmer is already mentioned in the main body, which may be sufficient. We should also keep in mind that both episodes so far have differences in their animation teams (Capricho and Hoyle only animate episode 1, while Todd, Garrard and Stevenson only animate episode 2), meaning it's likely the list would only grow more bloated down the line. User:SubZeroSilver (talk) 17:04, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:The_Amazing_Digital_Circus"