Talk:List of The Chosen episodes

Wording and character name fixes

Hello. I am in the process of making some wording and other fixes at this article. One of the most consistent errors was use of "Mary Magdalene" when the character's name in the show is "Mary of Magdala". This is not just confirmed by viewing the available videos of the show, but also online scripts and cast listings outside of Wikipedia. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 01:19, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

This source uses the name Mary Magdalene and it's on the official Angel Studios website. -- Cosmic6811 🍁 (T · C) 01:39, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

These sources as well: [1] [2] [3] [4] Do you have a source that uses the name Mary of Magdala? -- Cosmic6811 🍁 (T · C) 01:42, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

@Cosmic6811:, thank you for pointing this out! How strange. I know I saw it at the Angel Studios site as Mary of Magdala previously (it's been a few months) and that is how she is consistently referred to in the scripts, the show, and all of the Christmas specials (as well as The Messengers). I will correct that right away. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 01:49, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

She has been referred to as both - either would be fine. fandom and imdb cannot be used as sources, as they are user generated content without editorial oversight. ButlerBlog (talk) 21:26, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Air dates

This particular series has a unique element for air dates in that there are theatrical releases. The |OriginalAirDate= parameter is the date the episode was released on its platform, not the theatrical release. For previous theatrical releases, we have used {{efn}} to note the theatrical release date, if different. However, you cannot apply the template to the parameter until there is an actual date value, otherwise it will end up in Category:Episode lists with unformatted air dates as not properly formatted. So in simple terms: don't add an efn with a date until there is a date in the |OriginalAirDate=. ButlerBlog (talk) 17:37, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Is the following an appropriate edit per your comments above? [5] A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 17:51, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

It should ultimately match the first |OriginalAirDate= value (which is TBA based on the above), so no, that shouldn't have the theatrical release date either. However, I don't believe there is a maintenance category for that template's formatting, so it probably could have an {{efn}} for the theatrical release date without an entered value (I think). ButlerBlog (talk) 19:27, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Release date and Daily Signal

@David Gerard, you keep removing the link to a Daily Signal article on the release date of season 3 of The Chosen, saying it's "deprecated". If the article were about something political or controversial, I could agree with your removal of the source. However, in this case, I don't believe there should be concern about the validity of the source for the purpose we are seeking. To support that belief, I consulted with the Wikipedia information page relating to deprecated sources and found the following statement: "Deprecated sources are highly questionable sources that editors are discouraged from citing in articles, because they fail the reliable sources guideline in nearly all circumstances."[6] From what I can tell, this is one of those circumstances where using The Daily Signal as a source is not problematic. In the same article on the topic of deprecated sources, this is said:

"Acceptable uses of deprecated sources Deprecation is not a blanket retroactive "ban" on using the source in absolutely every situation, contrary to what has been reported in media headlines. In particular, reliability always depends on the specific content being cited, and all sources are reliable in at least some circumstances and unreliable in at least some others. Citations to deprecated sources should not be removed indiscriminately, and each case should be reviewed separately. While some deprecated sources have been completely eliminated as references, others have not." [7]

Based on the above, you seem to be indiscriminately removing the source from this article, and now in a disruptive manner, when it's unnecessary and unwarranted to do so. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 15:59, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I suggest that per WP:V, all claims in Wikipedia are required by hard policy to be verified to reliable sources. That would not include sources that are deprecated.

If you really, seriously, can only find a deprecated source for a claim, then you need to consider that the claim is likely not sufficiently well attested to include at all. WP:BURDEN - which is also hard policy - puts the onus to back a claim on the editor adding or re-adding material. That's you in this case.

Don't put deprecated sources into Wikipedia. - David Gerard (talk) 16:10, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Oh, come on, David. That's a nonsense rationale. It's a TV show and the link is to a date, nothing more. If the only other source is IMDB, or is primary, then those are better? And why not actually look for a better source if your Wikipedia purpose is to improve articles? You are choosing to edit war against what I assume is policy (see "Acceptable uses of deprecated sources" above) because ... why? What you're doing indiscriminately very much appears to be disruptive, not helpful, and not for the overall good of the article. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 16:28, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

This is Wikipedia, not fandom.com. Do you literally not have sources that aren't deprecated? - David Gerard (talk) 21:41, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

The citation for the streaming dates (which was removed along with the theatrical release date which is what had the questioned source) also covered the theatrical release date. I have updated to restore the removed dates that are already cited and cited the note with that same source (Deseret). Not go down an unnecessary rabbit trail, but I do not see Daily Signal in WP:DEPRECATED. If you're going to call it deprecated, I'd expect to see it in that list, or at least that you'd say it's de facto. ButlerBlog (talk) 23:10, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

David Gerard, stop it. I'm not writing at this article to turn it into a fan site type page. My edits don't indicate I'm a silly fan-girl. Your lack of good faith and manners is incredibly disappointing. I keep expecting more and better from Administrators, and for some reason, I continue to run into the ones who talk and act more like badly behaved, unkind non-admin editors. If, as you indicate ("This is Wikipedia, not fandom.com"), that there's a higher standard, then please DO be the example (you can start now, if you'd like). Further, as Butlerblog pointed out above, if Daily Caller isn't on a list somewhere, why have you been continually removing that source, saying it IS deprecated? A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 00:15, 3 March 2024 (UTC)