Talk:Lip Sync Battle Shorties

Episode titles

Episode titles for this series appear to be inconsistent within the sources; as such, we pick one style and apply consistently. Furthermore, despite what our reliable column sources say, press release calls the first episode a special. Something being a special does not prelude it to also being a pilot, but the point remains. Continuing to try to force a change like this goes against WP:BRD. Full-protection seemed appropriate here, but the guilty party here is the editor who was challenged and refused to follow proper procedures. Amaury (talk | contribs) 01:47, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

• I would like to start off by saying I am sorry for all the trouble and confusion caused here. My main annoyance was about my edits being completely reverted by Amaury without even checking the sources like Zap2it being updated with the January 2019 episodes, just judging the edits based off of who did it rather than what they did. I did also completely forget you could edit undos, so that it would only add on those two episodes rather than changing the rest of the episode titles. That being said, I did not know there was a consensus on what the proper formatting of the episode titles should be, I was mainly basing off of the titles listed on TheFutonCritic (which now has the rest of the 2019 premieres added, checking the site now). I also did not check any source stating the 'Pilot' to be titled 'Special'. Again, I was going off of what was said on TheFutonCritic. Sorry again for the problems. Magitroopa (talk) 02:06, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

I had missed that they were on Zap2it. If you would have just mentioned that the first time, there would never have been problems, but instead you reported they were on The Futon Critic when they're not, only a date of January 4. And we can't use the Nickelodeon website because content is always changing, and an episode that is available today may not be available tomorrow. You need to take a step back and actually learn how Wikipedia works. Nickandmore, while I have respect for him and have no qualms with him, is not a reliable source. And that's not me talking, I'm just following policy. I'm not saying he's wrong—in fact, I know he's virtually always correct, and the only times he's "wrong," is when networks make further last-minute scheduling changes—just that he cannot be used a source, per policies here. Then reporting me for vandalism because you weren't getting your way is just... mind-blowing. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:29, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

In terms of the episode titling format, I don't have a dog in that hunt – they started with "/" separations because that's how they were in The Futon Critic's listing; now they're being separated with ";" or "," in other sources. Because the sources conflict, we just need to come to a consensus as to which style is preferred by editors here. On the question of the pilot broadcast in 2016, I believe we have multiple sources calling it a "special", so my preference is that that is how it should referred to in the table – in the prose, we can mention that it's the original pilot, if that is desired. But it was called a "special" by sources from the beginning (and it's 1-hour rather than 30-minutes), so my preference is that we continue to call it that. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:53, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

 Note: The original 1-hour special does not appear to be listed in the United States Copyright Office (USCO) database (even though episodes 101–110 are listed), so that's not helpful in determining whether it had a title or not. Also note that in the USCO database, the listed season #1 episode titles use ";", so I'm now leaning in the direction that we should use ";" in the titles, as that would appear to be how the producers handle the episode titles themselves. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:06, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Season 2, episode 8 production code

@Amaury: Regarding the production code for this episode, Futon Critic seems to no longer be caring/worrying about Nickelodeon production codes. As shown with Double Dare, they gave "Hot Tamales vs. The Stylish Ones" #126, which already belongs to "Blue Whales vs. The Flossinators", and they gave "Relentless Goats vs. Purple Pandas" #127, which already belongs to "Dominating Duo vs. Blast from the Past". In this case, they gave "Hawaiian Luau; Dias de los Muertos Celebration; Superhero Training Camp" #208, however, that production code already belongs to episode 1 of season 2, "Havana Block Party; Mardi Gras Celebration; Basketball Court Get Down". With #205 belonging to "Broadway Style Weather Spectacular; Super Fun Circus; Cool Skiing Lodge" and #207 belonging to episode 10 of season 2, the only production code missing for season 2 is #204. Magitroopa (talk) 07:44, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

OK, if you think Futon Critic is "unreliable" for one or more prod. codes, your only option is to find another reliable source with prod. codes. Generally, that's the U.S. Copyright Office (USCO) database (which isn't 100% accurate either, but is probably 98-99% accurate in my experience). But, as I said earlier, the USCO database only has the season #1 episodes of this show currently. Therefore, I agree with Amaury on this – in the absence of other sourcing, we either go with what Futon Critic has for the prod. code (per WP:Verifiability, not truth), or we leave the entry blank (per WP:ONUS). Anything else is actually WP:OR, pretty much by definition... So, in this case, why don't we just leave it blank for now? --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:44, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

First, you can only do that if one production code is entirely missing. If a series ran for only one season of 20 episodes, and The Futon Critic had every single production code except #115, then you could say that the episode that has no production code is obviously #115. However, here it's tricky because we have two episodes with the same production code, and we can't just say January 18's episode is #204. That is WP:OR. It could be the season premiere that is #204. We don't know. If we had a little more, then maybe we could come up with something, but we don't. For example, there was a case of a series where The Futon Critic had #205 for Episode A and Copyright Office had #205 for Episode A and Episode B, and we had one production code that was missing: #207. Because The Futon Critic and Copyright Office both had #205 listed for Episode A, it was agreed that Copyright Office was wrong on Episode B, and Episode B was the missing #207. IJBall's method is much better than just making up or assuming stuff when it's not 100% clear. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:42, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, based on this, we should probably just remove both "208" codes from the table for now... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:44, 5 January 2019 (UTC)