Talk:Marco Polo (2014 TV series)

Was Queen Chabi Chinese?

There's no source saying she was Chinese? can you fix this? She was Mongol descent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.200.73.34 (talk) 08:54, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

More as nationality Chinese since Kublai claimed himself the sovereign of China (and subsequently disregarded the Mongol Khan election). Just like you would say Obama is American and not Kenyan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.183.131.140 (talk) 05:13, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Almost entirely fiction?

I just read the wikipedia article and it makes no reference to Marco Polo being a captive in Mongolia, or to any of his adventures in Mongolia and China depicted by the TV series. I enjoy the TV series but would like to know to what extent it is historically accurate. Would someone add a section to address that issue? John Link (talk) 16:28, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

I think that would be a wonderful addition to the article as well. PhotographerTom (talk) 10:44, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

I too was thinking this, there are so many inaccuracies I have already come across and I am only 2/3rds through the episodes. One I just came across, Gregory X was on crusade in Acre when he was elected pope, and he wasn’t even ordained, but an archdeacon. He gave a final sermon at Acre and then returned to Rime for ordination. They have conflated his time in Acre with his bring Pope. The Pope would never have taken such a perilous journey to Acre and Jerusalem, crossing the Mediterranean was dangerous enough that most Crusaders went overland to Constantinople. He is also the Pope that Kublai requested the priests and holy oil from in the first season episode one, but the priests, both of them, turned back. So having Kublai’s Christian uncle meeting with him at Acre is ridiculous. He not only wasn’t there, he mostly likely had already passed away, since he only reigned only til 1276, about 5 years. Or when Marco Polo was only 22 years old. I’m afraid the series plays quite fast and loose with history. Deliusfan (talk) 02:57, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

I just discovered that my section I added to address this was completely removed. All I did was research and reference existing previously researched Wikipedia articles to verify the facts as presented in the series, but it was judged as original and not refrrenced. My words were simply summaries from the pages I linked. Should I have just copied the references from all of those articles too? That would make the references on this page quite bloated, and only for the sake of one section. I thought I was meeting a desired need, it would have been nice to receive a warning and not just a deletion of hours of compilation. Deliusfan (talk) 21:55, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Mongolian actors?

In the series there is only one actors who is actually Mongolian. Most of the actors who are suppose to Mongolian are ethnically Chinese. Even when they speak Mongolian (which is rare), the pronunciation is very far off.

It's Pan-Asian cast like most other Hollywood production. I doubt wiki takes note for all of those other TV series. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.183.131.140 (talk) 05:03, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Neither does Takashi Sorimachi's Genghis Khan film.....but that's artistic license. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.183.131.140 (talk) 05:08, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

audience score

That guildline is not a rule and is still under heavy debate it is clear that there is a difference in viewer and critic score.... not pointing this out would be a bigger bias than only mentioning the negative..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Film#Audience_response — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.81.206.196 (talk) 01:12, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Firstly, Marco Polo is not a film, so going off the MOS for films is incorrect. But even if it was a film, per the MOS you cannot use audience ratings from IMDb or Rotten Tomatoes. I have copy/pasted the section below for you to read.

This content is not necessarily intended to be a standalone section, or a subsection, in a film article. Polls of the public carried out by a reliable source in an accredited manner, such as CinemaScore, may be used and placed in the appropriate release or reception-based section, depending on the available context. Do not quote comments from members of the general public (e.g., user comments from Amazon.com, the Internet Movie Database or personal blogs), as they are self-published and have no proven expertise or credibility in the field. Do not include user ratings submitted to websites such as the Internet Movie Database or Rotten Tomatoes, as they are vulnerable to vote stacking and demographic skew.

Please see WP:TVRECEPTION, specifically "In the case of the general public, we use Nielsen ratings to determine popularity of a show, as it would be extremely difficult to find an accurate representation of fan opinion. This means that IMDb, TV.com, and the other similar websites that give "fan polls" are not reliable sources of information. I trust this will be the end of your continued disruptive editing. Trut-h-urts man (T • C) 01:28, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

i was referring to that.... the link goes to the talk page of that guild line... that part of the guild line has been edited last month... also imdb requires a user profile before voting afaik, this would make it more difficult... but i agree that it's not as secure as say steam's user rating, as this is has a better validation as user actualy have to pay for the games... still calling it vandalism is BS... it is extra information with clear multiple sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.81.206.196 (talk) 02:04, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

I didn't call it vandalism. I called it disruptive editing. The talk page discussion did not reach a consensus (and its on the MOS Film page, which I already explained does not apply here). Whether or not IMDb requires a profile is irrelevant. IMDb is recognized site-wide as an unreliable source because it can be edited by its users (much the same way Wikipedia is not a reliable source on its own, and must use reliable sources to back the information that appears on a page). Trut-h-urts man (T • C) 02:18, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Would it be valid to list the user rating on Netflix itself? They may not be as vulnerable to voter stacking as a generic website - you need an actual Netflix account to vote. I will note that the above comment of "we use Nielsen ratings" is *not* applicable to Netflix exclusive shows! Netflix does not release "ratings" and they are the only one with that data. Observer31 (talk) 04:55, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

I understand that there's no way to confirm the validity of user based reviews, such as on Rotten Tomatoes, although I nonetheless sincerely believe that ignoring the average user score on Rotten Tomatoes, when it is in such an obvious contrast to the "critical" reviews, is showing more of a bias, then using an unsubstantiated source. When you look at the user rating on RT (93%) and you knowingly leave out that information, it is doing nothing but displaying bias against the show. I understand Wikipedia should do its utmost to remain a fair and neutral source of information, although clinging to whatever nonsense rule says that RT's user score should not be mentioned and cited is doing little other then discredit to Wikipedia's neutrality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.236.38 (talk) 05:03, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

not tv

This should be Marco Polo (2014 series) and this page shouldn't even redirect there, it should more correctly redirect to Marco Polo (miniseries). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.36.38.48 (talk) 23:58, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Marco Polo (miniseries) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 06:00, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Toon

http://www.betafilm.com/marcopolo via BBC kids is just called Marco Polo. We should disambiguate this. Ranze (talk) 08:55, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't think that should be the case. TheDwellerCamp (talk) 17:44, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Marco Polo (miniseries) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:20, 5 October 2023 (UTC)