Talk:Liv and Maddie

"Olivia" vs "Madison"

The audience discovers Maddie's full name to be "Madison" because of Willow, despite being there no sources to this credit. Whoever presumes that Liv's full first name is "Olivia" may not be wrong, but if it is neither credited or spoken in the show it should not be added to the article! Also, if there happens to be a source for "Madison" other than scripted, it would be greatly appreciated! Ivaroa (talk) 04:29, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

The actual episode as aired is a published primary reliable source for the contents in that episode. An in episode reveal of the name is sufficient if the details of the reveal are cited. I agree that a formal name for a presumed nick-name should not be in the article based on that presumption and must have a proper reference. The full name is in-universe trivia, though, and need not be added to the article and I would prefer we just stick with what the published credits say for this level of description of the characters. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:49, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Actually in one of the episodes, Karen Rooney says "Madison Rooney!" and also says "Olivia Rooney!" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Livandmaddiefan (talk • contribs) 19:26, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

It's interesting in-universe background information, but it's not their officially credited character names, so we must stay with Liv and Maddie. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:31, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Music not covered

In the episode "Fa La La-A-Rooney" Dove Cameron and Ella Anderson also performed a duet of "Up on the House Top" by Benjamin Hanby, which I've added to the episode list in the past, but is no longer shown. Unlike Dove's cover of "Let It Snow! Let It Snow! Let It Snow!," the duet wasn't covered on any album, nor added to any music video. Will I have to get an illegally downloaded YouTube video of the promo to prove that this duet existed? ---------User:DanTD (talk) 14:38, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Is it mentioned in the end credits of the episode giving Cameron and Anderson performance credit? If so, the episode itself is the reliable source. Generally anything in an aired episode can use the episode itself as a reference. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:06, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

That, I completely forgot about, I'm afraid. In the meantime, I've got this. But that whole scene where Anderson's character tries to upstage Liv Rooney does exist in the episode. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 01:42, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

If it exists in the episode it is verifiable as anybody who wished to can view the episode (iTunes and Amazon legally at the minimum - repeats over the air as well). Sources don't need to be free, they just need to be there. I generally trust established editors to accurately report what is in an episode. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:04, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Minor characters

Why were so many of the minor characters removed if the article includes guest stars? Some of these characters had an important role in the plots of certain episodes. Like Kylie was an important character in Steal-A-Rooney for example, and Ocean was in two episodes and not just one. Also some of the details removed didn't seem minor, like Diggie calling Maddie Rooney classic and/or Mads, what makes that less important than Stains rubbing her nose? Also, what was with the order on the cast and characters picture caption? I saw it starts with Joey and THEN Parker, from the left. Didn't it? Am I wrong? Is it not supposed to be viewed from the left? Please tell me! 172.243.13.227 (talk) 05:56, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

If you are unsure of the identification of characters see this and check the bios at that link. They were identified correctly before you made your changes and yes they are from the left. Click on a face to go to the description in the article.

Put back the characters you think are important and make sure why is reflected in the descriptions. Geraldo Perez (talk) 13:14, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Second season: Starting on a Monday?

As User:CHall2002 pointed out, September 1 will not be a Sunday. However, the list of episodes article claims the second season starts September 1. Is it or is it not starting September 1? The only reason I can think of as to why it would air on a Monday is because it's Labor Day. Do we know for sure if it is starting September 1 or not? This might just be speculation. Maybe it's starting September 7? Or the 14th? Or even the 21th or the 28th? Sources? Evidence? Anything? 172.243.0.31 (talk) 12:54, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

The "1" looks to be a placeholder for software that can't handle lack of day in a date. I have no problem leaving it out for now. The info in the source will be more believable when there is an episode name there and other sources start publishing dates. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:13, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

List-defined references

IPv6 2602:306:CD0A:8DD0::/64 is removing the existing list-defined references from the article. See Help:List-defined references for a description of what they are and why they are used. This article is currently using them per the usage note: "While it is often tidier to remove all citations from the source text, an acceptable compromise (especially for small articles) could be to only use LDR for citations used multiple times.". This puts the named multi use references in the references section and makes maintenance of those references easier. I can see no valid reason to remove them from this article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:28, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Proposed split of character list

I think the character list is long enough, with detailed descriptions especially for the main cast, that it should be split into its own article now. nyuszika7h (talk) 22:23, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Support - Per reasons stated above. When there are only some characters, it's fine, but the main article should really only be a brief overview of everything. Amaury (talk) 22:29, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Support - I totally agree, but I wonder why you have not done this with Austin & Ally, Good Luck Charlie, Jessie and Girl Meets World?.--Philip J Fry • (talk) 23:07, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Comment - In my opinion, I don't think they have enough characters listed yet to be considered for a split. Compared to the characters section of Liv and Maddie, they're not that large. You should have seen how large the characters sections of Lab Rats and Mighty Med got before they were split. Amaury (talk) 23:49, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

 Done nyuszika7h (talk) 17:31, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Episode titles, -a- or -A-

All the episodes are of the form SOMETHING-A-ROONEY. Some Disney sources use Something-A-Rooney. iTunes uses -a-, Amazon uses -A-. Copyright office and DisneyABCpress is all caps. Zap2it used as a title reference on list of episode articles uses -a-. The Wikipedia manual of style at MOS:CT says all articles (that means the words "the", "a" and "an") are rendered lower case unless they are the starting or ending word in a title. Hyphens are ignored for the purposes of applying this rule. That means we should use -a- for titles in this and other related article to refer to the episode titles. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:19, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Category disputes

Most of the recently added categories seemed valid. The plot mentions for example that some events take place at Ridgewood High, Liv was an actress and later throughout the series gets more roles, and Television duos seems just as valid to Liv and Maddie as it does to Sam & Cat. Am I missing something? Also, the edit to the plot that mentioned Pete later becoming a coach of a college team in Beloit seemed valid as well; it was mentioned on the sister article List of Liv and Maddie episodes. Additionally, the plot of the show revolves around the friendship of the twins (as well as their respective friends) and the life of the Rooney family; therefore, I don't see the point of removing the categories for television series about families and television series about friendship. Meanwhile, I attempted to solve the dispute regarding television duos by creating a category for television series with two main characters (and a subcat for television series with multiple main characters), but these categories were rejected. If they can't go on this page then was I wrong to make them? Help appreciated here. Kkjj (talk) 04:59, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

See WP:Defining. "A defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently define the subject as having". Those categories are not defining characteristics for this article which is why they were removed. They are descriptions the show, some are editor evaluations but they don't define it. As to the becoming a coach at a college that seems a minor plot point that doesn't really drive much of the series as much as his being a coach at the schools the twins attend during the show however that is just my opinion and if other editors think it belongs I'm fine with it Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:12, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

No, "Television duos" actually seems much less relevant in the case of this show. On Sam & Cat, both the 'A' and 'B' storylines pretty much always involved the two characters: S&C is very similar to something like Drake & Josh. Liv and Maddie, OTOH, is much more a "family" sitcom – the 'B' storylines typically involve either Joey or Parker, and in some episodes one of the "twins" has a relatively minor role. L&M is much less a "duo" show, and more of an "ensemble". Also, I checked – while there was some sourcing (e.g. Nick press releases) that actually referred to Sam & Cat as a "duo", I didn't find anything like that for Liv and Maddie. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 08:08, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

From the disneyabcpress they summarized the plot as:

“Liv and Maddie” follows the journey of identical twins Liv, a former television star back home in Wisconsin and in the process of adding movie star to her credits, as well as beginning to focus on her music career, and Maddie, an outstanding student and basketball phenomenon recovering from an injured knee. The series centers on the unbreakable bond the twins share though they have wildly different personalities. To complicate their teenage lives, both parents work at their high school and their younger brothers are always stirring up trouble.

Then at TheFutonCritic.com the description was:

The series follows 16-year-old identical twin sisters Liv, a Hollywood star who has returned home to Wisconsin, and Maddie, a hometown basketball star, as they experience the highs and lows of high school, bothersome brothers and each other's differences. In addition to Cameron, it stars Joey Bragg and Tenzing Norgay Trainor as younger brothers Joey and Parker Rooney, respectively; Kali Rocha as mom, Karen Rooney; and Benjamin King as dad, Pete Rooney.

Is this not enough to prove the show is about high school and friendship? Plus, as IJBall points out (so do the descriptions), it is indead a "family" show. Therefore, that should have also been kept. Kkjj (talk) 02:37, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

@Kkjj: Lots of different types of shows have elements of friendship and have some of the scripted action occur in high school particularly with the ages of the characters but I don't think those are defining characteristics of this show given the descriptions given and this article's lead. Being a family show is much more defining though as a category as stories revolve around the family mostly with the twins the main focus. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:24, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes, "high school" isn't defining for L&M either – one way to tell if something is "defining" for a TV show is if the primary setting for ths show is the school. Thus, high school would be defining for a show like Saved by the Bell, where the vast majority of scenes took place at the school. By contrast, most scenes on L&M probably take place in the Rooney house – the majority of scenes certainly don't take place in the high school (esp. earlier on, before Parker was promoted from middle school). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:00, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

KKJJ, you're no doubt editing in good faith, but adding a category, albeit undisputed, when you've already been confronted, for lack of better word, on the other categories you've added without having a discussion and getting others' opinions is not the best practice. In addition, there was absolutely no need to capitalize some of the words you capitalized as they're just hidden notes that are only seen while editing in source mode and therefore don't really need to follow the rules. There was also no need to show which seasons those composers worked for as it's sufficient as hidden notes, and we don't really about that stuff, just who did the composing. Finally, if you feel that Pete becoming a coach at Beloit is a major plot point instead of something minor like Geraldo Perez mentioned above, then feel free to re-add that, but anything about categories and the like, please discuss first. Amaury (talk | contribs) 22:30, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Don't you think it should at least have Category:Television series about sisters? Not all twins are sisters, like for example shows like The Thundermans, Gravity Falls, and I Didn't Do It feature fraternal twins. I also think Category:Television series about actors is valid as Liv was an actress and is still getting roles, Category:Television series about families makes just as much sense to Liv and Maddie as it does to Girl Meets World (which is more about school than families), and Category:Television series about friendship also makes sense as the twins' friendship is a key point to the plot. Finally I don't see why Category:Television series with multiple main characters can't be included either, the show is about the twins, brothers, and parents. On a side note that category was also removed on Victorious and Big Time Rush, just as Category:Television series about families was removed on Good Luck Charlie. Kkjj (talk) 06:59, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Category:Teen sitcoms covers most of that, see sitcom. The show is not about actors, that is one of the characters and her occasional occupation, acting is not the focus of the show. Category:Fictional identical twins does apply. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:32, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Cast list, re: season 4

Actually, I think it's OK to add Lauren Lindzey Donzis to the in-article cast list (but not to the infobox), provided it's properly sourced. It's just that I want a better WP:RS than whatever the heck "headlineplanet.com" is... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:42, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: Since we're on the subject, any theories as to why Benjamin King is "leaving" the show? I'm sure he'll guest star sometimes, like Hal Sparks does over on Lab Rats: Elite Force, but yeah. And how do you think it will be explained in the show (for Pete)? Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:53, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

I recall stumbling upon an article that basically said it was health-related on King's part. I believe I've also stumbled across stuff on the internet implying that he wouldn't show up in season #4 at all. (Add this to the list of reasons why I'm pretty sure that season #4 will turn out to be a bad idea...) I'm sure the show will just say he's back in Wisconsin coaching at the college there... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:56, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

@IJBall: If that is the case, I hope it's nothing serious. Also, from reading your messages, it seems like you don't like shows with four seasons, huh? Haha! Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:06, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/08/19/liv-maddie-title-season-four also has it. It looks like from a press release but I couldn't find it with a brief search. I think it is OK to be in the article but not in the infobox yet as won't really know if starring or recurring until we see actual credits. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:19, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 September 2016

You should change the sign from Liv and Maddie, to the new logo, which says Liv and Maddie: Cali Style, because that is what is will known as from season four. Livandmaddiefan (talk) 19:20, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

 Not done It's still Liv and Maddie, and Cali Style is just a subtitle. Amaury (talk | contribs) 19:22, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Also note that this article is for the whole series, not just the last season. The subtitle was not added retroactively to seasons 1–3. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:32, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Duplicate plot summaries

Do we really need two plot summaries in the same section? I tried merging them in this edit along with filling in some missing details. Like for example, the original plot summaries never mentioned Maddie's relationship with Diggie, nor did they mention Ruby. Diggie is actually the only character outside the Rooney family to appear since the very first episode. Shouldn't he get a mention? In fact, tomorrow's episode is about him and Josh competing for Maddie. This has been a plot point in many episodes, even before Josh was involved. Also, the lead of this article is much too short. A longer lead would be be much more sufficient. The original lead section from 2014-2015 mentioned more details about the plot and the production of the show, including its renewals for a season and third season. Furthermore, the article about Victorious mentions the recurring characters in the cast section. In fact, this article lacks severely compared to other articles about teen sitcoms. Its lead is much too short, the two plot summaries are redundant overall, and there is not as much information as there is about other teen sitcoms like this. Besides Victorious, other articles about teen sitcoms that are better than this article include Good Luck Charlie, iCarly, Austin & Ally, Jessie, and A.N.T. Farm. Like for example, iCarly actually describes the characters in a few words, with a link to the character list for further information. This article only lists the main characters and nothing else. It's a wonder this article can't be more developed like the other articles I mentioned. Anyone like my last edit to this article? Kkjj (talk) 07:48, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

No. There are no duplicates. The lead is not supposed to be bogged down with a bunch of information or a lot of details, it is supposed to be a brief introduction of what channel the series airs on, who it stars, and when it first aired, and maybe some other things, such as what type of show it is. Specific details belong in the Plot section or character bios, not the lead. Information about renewals belongs in the Production section, not the lead. A recurring cast list is not needed here because a characters article exists, and how other articles do things do not set any precedence over other articles. Amaury (talk | contribs) 07:56, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

I checked Girl Meets World and saw more plot information in the lead than the actual plot. I know they're different shows, but they're both on Disney Channel. Wizards of Waverly Place is another article with a longer lead section than this article. Also why is it Girl Meets World can have Category:Television series about families yet Liv and Maddie can't? It wasn't on Good Luck Charlie either. My point? The fact that this article has been treated differently from other articles. If you'll look I actually did put details about the creation of the show in my last edit. The part about it having cutaways is plot information. Also I believe the lead should be rewritten since this show is ending soon (I heard it's ending in March). This is actually my favorite show and I'm dismayed that it doesn't have as good an article as I wish it did. Also, I'm going to cry the day it ends. Kkjj (talk) 12:47, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

It's still a fairly short introduction, but again, how other articles do things don't set precedence over other articles. Also, the cutaway feature is already mentioned in the lead. And I don't care about your personal feelings toward the series as articles should be written from an unbiased view. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:07, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

What I mean is I moved facts that are plot related to the plot. The cutaway feature is plot, isn't it? And do we really need two summaries of the plot? I'll confess, I wrote what became the first part of the plot section in 2014, because I was trying to give this article more context like the other shows. Compared to articles like Wizards of Waverly Place, Good Luck Charlie, iCarly, and A.N.T. Farm, Liv and Maddie looks lacking. I don't see how that's fair. While the article indeed has to be unbiased, it doesn't make sense for this article not to follow the guidelines set by other articles, all of which look much better. It's more satisfying to have all the important facts in the lead without leaving out details. And I don't get the point of listing Joey Bragg, Tenzing Norgay Trainor, Kali Rocha, Benjamin King, and Lauren Lindsey Donzis as stars when the show is mainly focused on the twins. Not to mention Benjamin King isn't in the fourth season and Lauren Lindsey Donzis wasn't the first three seasons. And despite being listed as "starring", Lauren Lindsey Donzis's character (Ruby) is not mentioned in the current plot summary, even though I mentioned her in mine. Was there anything you liked in my edit? Another thing I noticed is that one of the sources I provided for the reception was removed, and I don't know why. It was still working from what I could tell. That's one of the things this article lacks compared to other articles about teen sitcoms: a reception section. Look at iCarly and Good Luck Charlie for example, they have notable reviews. I don't see why I had to be the one to add the reception at all, and after three years of the show's existence. Sanjay and Craig didn't take nearly that long to get reviews, and neither did Breadwinners. And those are my least favorite shows (I only watch them when I'm bored). Personal feelings aside, I don't see the point of Liv and Maddie looking lacking compared to Sanjay and Craig, Breadwinners, and Fanboy and Chum Chum, because more people like Liv and Maddie anyway (I've never met a person who liked Sanjay and Craig or Breadwinners, and they're always considered to be the two worst shows ever.) Can we get a third opinion on this from another user besides myself? Kkjj (talk) 15:46, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm not saying the current lede for this article is perfect – for one thing it's missing the series' premiere date. But it's an acceptable summary introduction to the series and the article. I don't believe it needs a wholesale overhaul. Ditto the rest of the article. If editors feel that changes need to be made, I would advise they make those changes section by section, rather than trying to change the entire article all at once. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:05, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall:: I was going to add the series' premiere date, but only after it officially ends. The sentence "Liv and Maddie, titled Liv and Maddie: Cali Style in its fourth season, is an American sitcom that airs on Disney Channel." was planned to be changed to "Liv and Maddie, titled Liv and Maddie: Cali Style in its fourth season, is an American sitcom that aired from July 19, 2013 to March 24, 2017 on Disney Channel.", because that's how they do it on other articles about cancelled television series, which includes most of the shows I previously mentioned except Breadwinners. The fact that Breadwinners might still be on after Liv and Maddie ends makes me sick (as previously stated, I hate Breadwinners just like I hate Sanjay and Craig). But despite that, this article about Liv and Maddie lacks compared to the article about Breadwinners, as well as the other articles I mentioned including Sanjay and Craig which I hate even more than Breadwinners. But back to the point: which edits should I reinstate? And about the "tag bombing", I still feel that the lead section of this article is severely lacking compared to articles like Good Luck Charlie and Wizards of Waverly Place, and there are only two reviews mentioned in the reception section. Once again, the other articles I previously mentioned (including my two least favorites: Breadwinners and Sanjay and Craig) all have far more satisfying details about their reception. Kkjj (talk) 00:39, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Again, how other articles do things, whether right or wrong, does not set precedence over other articles. I don't know how much simpler I can make that. Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:50, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

@Amaury: In looking over the 'Plot' section again, I agree that it is redundant – the second paragraph restates too much of what the first paragraph covers. I would advise that those two paragraphs be merged and the redundancy be trimmed/eliminated. I'll also go ahead and ping MPFitz1968 to this conversation as well, as he has displayed a facility for this kind of article editing... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:50, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

@Kkjj: I find that your proposed 'Plot' section has problems of its own, particularly on the WP:TONE side, and also I'd like more discussion here as to how we should cover season 4 vs. seasons 1–3. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:29, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall:, did you ever ping MPFitz1968? I tried to and he didn't reply (I tried last January after this discussion started). And Amaury, did you REALLY have the remove the ref I provided in the reception? It still works, so what's wrong with it? I'm talking about this edit BTW. And also, you say that the templates don't need capitalization, but what's the point of the spaces? Kkjj (talk) 19:28, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

It's a hidden note; it doesn't need to follow grammatical/conventional rules too strictly, so it's pointless to capitalize those. Spacing, on the other hand, makes it easier to fight vandalism when the vandalism edit isn't very obvious. When there's a wall of text with messy formatting, for example, it's be a nightmare trying to find what the vandal has changed. Amaury (talk | contribs) 20:11, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

@Kkjj: I did ping MPFitz1968, but it's a volunteer project and no one has to show up and edit what they don't want to. I may try and tackle the 'Plot' section myself, but when I first looked at it last time, I felt like it would be a job that would require a fair chunk of my time, so I'm not going to try to tackle in until I have some free time (likely in a couple of weeks). As for the spacing issue, this is what's considered to be a WP:NOTBROKEN issue – it is generally not a good idea to do things like remove spacing as another editor may have put the spacing in there deliberately (e.g. to facilitate text reading in 'Edit source' mode), and stuff like spacing and line breaks really shouldn't be removed if they don't need to be (certainly not without Talk page consensus to do so). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:17, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

I mainly meant the spaces in the plainlist template. And what was wrong with the ref? Or can I put it back? Kkjj (talk) 20:22, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

@Kkjj: Again, previous spacing left in the templates (or in references) like that is not "wrong" – it's best just to leave it. As for the ref, feel free to restore it, but leave the "?_r=0" off the end of the URL. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:26, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

FWIW, we still need somebody to rewrite that 'Plot' section, and merge the two paragraphs. As it happens, my work load is starting to lighten over the coming two weeks, so I may and try to tackle it myself, if somebody doesn't get it first. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:14, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Please remove one of the paragraphs now and figure out what's missing later. It looks as if the page has been vandalized for the past month -- it's not legible in its current form, it's distracting. The second paragraph covers *everything* important that is in the first already, so that's why I removed the top one. 2602:30A:2CD0:5820:F475:2670:E3B2:AAAB (talk) 02:26, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

IJBall has plans to, but there is nothing wrong with the current version and it is fine until that happens. Your edits are causing even more problems. Also, stop using socks to partake in your disruptive editing. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:31, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Revisiting: Continued disruptive editing

We still have someone trying to make wholesale changes to the article, without discussion, and against consensus.

I have already explained the best way to approach this – make the changes, one edit at time, going section by section (i.e. one section at a time), while discussing the proposed changes on the Talk page – but this advice has been ignored. At this point, these continued edits can only be described as Disruptive editing (with basically a side of WP:OWN). If they continue, it is certain that either myself, or another watcher of this article, will either seek to have to article protected, or will seek to have the offending editor blocked for disruption. Last chance. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 06:25, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: Agreed. What confuses me even more is that KKjj is not blocked, but is using IPs to make those edits. If it's to avoid being detected, they must think we're dumb and not able to put two and two together—as in, detect that the edit patterns are the same. Amaury (talk | contribs) 13:12, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

And now I'm thinking a block of the master may be in order. Whether temporary or indefinite, I don't know. Amaury (talk | contribs) 08:14, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

What exactly was wrong with the recent edit I made? And what do I have to do to make my edits acceptable? Kkjj (talk) 08:23, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Please read my first post in this very topic – please follow this advice. Also understand that just because you make a change doesn't mean that other editors will think it's an "improvement" or that the change was necessary. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 08:27, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: OK, which edit should I make first? And which ones should I reinstate? Kkjj (talk) 09:29, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

None of them. You've essentially lost that right due to your high level of disruption. Any changes you want done should be posted here for other editors to look at and do themselves if they consider them to be good, but I can't guarantee you they will be done. Amaury (talk | contribs) 09:41, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed changes to article

OK, can I suggest the following then:

Infobox:

Add | show_name_2 = Liv and Maddie: Cali Style ''{{small|(season 4)}}', like what was done on Regular Show Add back the Plainlist template for the creators, composers, executive producers Change the genre back to Family/Teen sitcom

Lead description:

Change it to:

Liv and Maddie, titled Liv and Maddie: Cali Style in its fourth season, is an American teen sitcom created by John D. Beck and Ron Hart that originally aired on Disney Channel from July 19, 2013 to March 24, 2017. The series stars Dove Cameron in a dual role as identical twin sisters with entirely different personalities, with Liv being a girly girl who was an actress in Hollywood for four years and Maddie being a tomboy with a facility for sports, particularly basketball. The series revolves around Liv readjusting to normal family life after production on her hit television program Sing It Loud! ended, as well as the two sisters being best friends despite their opposing personalities and different interests.

Plot:

Add back the longer plot summary:

Extended content

After finishing a four-year stint in Hollywood filming a popular television series called Sing It Loud!, actress Liv Rooney returns to her birthplace of Stevens Point, Wisconsin to the open arms of her family, despite being offered more roles in other series and films. Liv decided to come home because she missed her family and wanted to see them again. She is happily reunited with identical twin sister Maddie, who is her best friend. Liv is very girly and enjoys anytime someone mentions her former career, while Maddie is sporty and is the captain of her school's basketball team. The twins have two younger brothers named Joey and Parker. Joey is a typical awkward teen who is one year younger than the twins, while Parker is a clever teen with a mischievous personality and the youngest child of the Rooney family. Their father Pete is the coach for Maddie's basketball team who eventually achieves his dream of becoming coach for a college team in Beloit, Wisconsin, while their mother Karen is the school psychologist and later vice-principal starting in the second season. In the first three seasons, most events take place at either Ridgewood High, the high school that Liv, Maddie, Joey, and later Parker, due to being a child prodigy, all attend, or the Rooney residence. At the end of the third season, the Rooney house collapses due to a series of tunnels created by Parker and Maddie gets enrolled in a college in Los Angeles, California. This prompts the rest of the Rooneys (except Pete who remains in Wisconsin to continue his coaching job) to move to Malibu, California as well, to take up residence with Karen's younger sister Dena, and her daughter Ruby, where the series' fourth season takes place. A significant feature of the series are documentary-style cutaways where major characters and the supporting characters speak to the viewers to explain various things and their opinions on the situations in which they are featured in each episode.

Change "&" to "and" in the Songs section

Add back the end dates for the first and second seasons

Add back link to sibling rivalry

Add back categories Category:American children's television sitcoms, Category:Television series about sisters, and Category:Television series about sisters in lieu of Category:American children's comedy television series, Category:American television sitcoms, and Category:Fictional identical twins

Finally, proposed rewrite of the section "Production". Proposed change:

Extended content

===Development=== In the summer of 2012, Oops Doughnuts Productions had shopped a script of a project called Bits and Pieces which featured a blended family similar to series like The Brady Bunch and Step by Step. The series followed Jodie Sullenger (Kali Rocha), mother of Alanna (Dove Cameron) and Sticky (Joey Bragg), who married Pete Fickman (Benjamin King), father of Crystal (Cozi Zuehlsdorff) and Brody (Tenzing Norgay Trainor), with all six adjusting to life under the same roof. Eventually, Disney chose to change the concept of Bits and Pieces into one about a pair of twins. Now titled Liv and Maddie, the series began production in April 2013. The series was produced under a joint venture between Beck & Hart Productions, Oops Doughnuts Productions, and It's a Laugh Productions. The series' co-creators John D. Beck and Ron Hart are a production-writing team whose credits include According to Jim, Hey Arnold!, and Shake It Up!. They also served as executive producers alongside Andy Fickman, who was the only director who participated in all four seasons of the series. He directed 20 of the 21 episodes of the first season, as well as four of the second season, two of the third season, and four of the fourth season. On January 13, 2014, Disney Channel renewed Liv and Maddie for a 13-episode second season slated to premiere in fall 2014. The second season was later expanded to 24 episodes. The first season ended on July 27, 2014, and the second season premiered on September 21, 2014. On April 3, 2015, the series was renewed for a third season by Disney Channel. The second season ended on August 23, 2015, and the third season premiered on September 13, 2015. On December 21, 2015, actress Dove Cameron stated that Disney Channel was picking up Liv and Maddie for a fourth season. On June 19, 2016, series creator Ron Hart announced on Twitter that the fourth season would premiere in fall 2016. On July 1, 2016, Dove Cameron stated that they had filmed the series' final episode. On August 19, 2016, it was announced by the series' creators, John D. Beck and Ron Hart, that the final season would be called Liv and Maddie: Cali Style. They also stated that the fourth and final season would premiere on September 23, 2016. ===Casting=== Casting took place during the spring of 2012; however, only a pilot episode was produced. Instead of hiring a new cast, production chose to keep those whom they had already hired and film a completely new pilot. The story now focused on Dove Cameron playing dual roles with the same parents and brothers. Lead billing for Cozi Zuehlsdorff was later dropped to guest star. The family name of "Rooney" was picked because of Sullenger's enjoyment of the Pittsburgh Steelers, a team owned by the Rooney family. References

Is that OK? Kkjj (talk) 12:07, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

We said to propose changes little by little, not in a big wall of text. None of those changes is happening, and we've already explained why:

1. Not everything in the info box uses plainlist because that is not how they are listed on the on-screen credits, separated.
2. Saying it's a teen sitcom is WP:OR when the sources don't call it that.
3. That is an inappropriate use of show_name2 parameter.
4. Both the lead and Plot sections should be short, but concise. Your changes make both way too long.
5. The end dates for the first two seasons are already mentioned there.
6. We don't link common words.
7. Those categories are not WP:DEFINING to the series.

Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:10, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

• @Kkjj: First, thank you for actually taking the time to list out your proposed changes for discussion...
  For your first suggestions, I don't like how you've taken the "girly girl" and "tomboy" stuff from the 'Plot' section and put it instead in the lede – I feel strongly that that should stay in the 'Plot' section. However, I would not object to one additional sentence being added to the lede that explains the series' premise – something along the lines of: "The series stars Dove Cameron playing the dual roles of Liv, who has returned home after starring on a TV show in Hollywood for four years, and Maddie, her identical twin who remained behind. The series also stars Joey Bragg, Tenzing Norgay Trainor, Kali Rocha, Benjamin King, and Lauren Lindsey Donzis. A significant feature of the series are documentary-style cutaways where characters speak to the viewers to explain their opinions on various situations in each episode. That we keep the good parts of the lede we've got, while hopefully addressing your main concern about the lede not sufficiently summarizing the series' premise.
  On the 'Plot' section, I don't see where what you're suggesting is clearly preferable to what we have... What do you feel is missing from the current 'Plot' section? Can you be specific?...
  I have no opinion on the "&" vs. "and" thing. I actually think a link to sibling rivalry is fine – I'll go ahead and link to that.
  And as Amaury said, we've been over and over the categories thing, and the consensus is strongly that the categories you want to add are not WP:DEFINING for this series.
  Finally, your suggested changes to the 'Production' section are extensive – I'll have to look at those later, to see if and of your suggested changes would be improvements... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:20, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
  • @Amaury: How is it OR to say it's a teen sitcom when it's categorized as such? And about the categories, how is it not defining that it's a show about sisters and twins? Literally *every* source I've *ever* seen talking about the show mentions that, because it's the very premise of the show! And I don't think Fictional identical twins should be there because this article is about the show and not the characters. Also, where were the end dates for the first two seasons already mentioned? Kkjj (talk) 16:45, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
    • "Teen" and "sitcom" are usually listed as separate genres from what I have seen. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:46, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
      • @IJBall: Then why does the page have the category for teen sitcoms? Also another one I forgot to mention: how is the use of the show_name2 parameter inappropriate? Kkjj (talk) 16:50, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
        • Dunno. But if it was to be included as genres, "Sitcom" and "Teen" would be on separate lines in the infobox. In the case of the title, show_name_2 is considered unnecessary because the 4th season title isn't a "totally new title", but is just an "add-on" to the regular title – notice that we don't include the 4th season title in the infobox at Lab Rats (U.S. TV series) either... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:54, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

An appropriate use of that template would be for when a series that originated in, say, the UK was named something different in, say, the US. That's not the case here, it is simply an extension as IJBall mentioned. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:40, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

With regard to the genre, please see here, here, and here. Teen sitcom is not listed in any of those. Although The Futon Critic lists it as a comedy, so that's something that would be worth adding as well as re-adding the category for it. Amaury (talk | contribs) 20:13, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

'Episodes' section

Note that according to some of the regulars at WT:TV, the best way to follow MOS:TV is to put the 'Episodes' section immediately after the 'Plot' section. However, I think the current arrangement of the sections at this article, with the 'Episodes' section after the 'Production' section (etc.), is satisfactory, and doesn't particularly need changing IMO. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:25, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

I think it's usually better to put the "Episodes" section higher up, just not directly in the "Plot" section, as the that theory has been already proven wrong by some policy/guideline page – series overview counts as content, sections don't all have to contain prose. nyuszika7h (talk) 05:33, 1 June 2017 (UTC)