Talk:Masters of Sex

It's already aired, so it's not upcoming

Already aired, already watched. ""Masters of Sex," one of this fall's most hotly-anticipated new series, is headed to Showtime on September 29, but -- surprise! -- the premiere hit the Internet two weeks early." [1] B^e——C_ritical 20:10, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

This source is inadequate. Basically, no article should indicate that the show won't be available till a certain date, when it's already available. So help me fix it or stop edit warring out my changes. In reality, the premier has already come and gone, I've sourced that. B^e——C_ritical 19:40, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Shows often post their pilots online to gain buzz for the actual premiere, they can be noted in the article but they do not count as an actual premiere because the episode wasn't broadcast on television, it was not made widely available to all markets. The series is still upcoming because it hasn't actually been broadcast yet. Air dates do not refer to when they were made available online, but to when episodes were first broadcast on television. -- SchrutedIt08 (talk) 22:43, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

I completely agree with User:SchrutedIt08's reasoning. See The New Normal (TV series)#Marketing, Revolution (TV series)#Advance screenings, and The Mindy Project#Production and development for identical situations. Advance screenings online, now a common marketing tactic, does not count as the premiere airdate. -- Wikipedical (talk) 22:53, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

You still need to make plain that, as I've said, that it is not UPCOMING. Further, "it was not made widely available to all markets" what are you talking about? It was released on the internet, thus making it available to all markets. And more than that, TV is often not available in all markets... the internet is, but TV isn't. What you say makes no sense whatsoever. It's fine to say it has not "premiered," if you have a technical definition that makes "premier" only about TV, but it's not fine to say it is "upcoming." Further, IF it can only premier on TV, THEN it is not right to call it a TV series, you have to think up some other name. So your arguments break right down. B^e——C_ritical 00:42, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

And to give you some background, I depend on WP for knowing when shows are going to air. I've been mislead quite a few times, and this is probably why. Need to note (in the lead) when the first episode (or first and second in this case) is actually released, not just when some TV station carries it. B^e——C_ritical 00:47, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

You are making valid points. I don't agree with them, but they are valid. Nonetheless, your bold editing and multiple reverts were inappropriate in this case. Instead of adding references to back your claims, you were using your own opinions in edit summaries to dispute reliable sources, which wasn't constructive. You are welcome to make your case at a more appropriate area, like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television. But you need to start that conversation and gain consensus before making these changes again, since there are more editors who disagree with you here. -- Wikipedical (talk) 02:34, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

It IS upcoming. This is a television show and it has not aired on television yet.

Why can't you just add a sentence to the article stating that Showtime made the pilot available online before the premiere? --SubSeven (talk) 03:27, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

SubSeven, sounds good, about adding a sentence. I'm wondering what makes a show a "television show?" It's a series... does that make it television? What's TV anyway? Is Orange is the New Black TV? If it is TV, then what is the definition of airing on TV? I mean, a definition other than release on the web?

It's a television show because it is produced for, and distributed via, Showtime: a cable television network. First-run episodes are shown on Showtime and nowhere else. The fact that the premiere episode was posted online for promotional reasons doesn't change this, much like the fact that it will later be available on DVD, ITunes, etc. won't change it. --SubSeven (talk) 19:14, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedical, okay but I did add a reference to the talk page. We aren't having trouble with the sourcing really, but the definition of words, and I think the definitions are changing due to technology. Might not have needed to be an issue even a few years ago. B^e——C_ritical 04:04, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

historical accuracy

Since the storyline seems somewhat preposterous at various turns, I think a section on historical accuracy is appropriate. This should mention that Thomas Maier, a well-respected biographer, not only wrote the book upon which the series is based, but acts as a producer, writer and consultant. I'd also quote Michelle Ashford, in an interview released by Showtime to youtube: "We're pretty fastidious about the facts...we didn't have to embellish because they're so fascinating in their own right" Michelle Ashford in an interview released by showtime to youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=uVbAOwpAy2k#t=56 Bustter (talk) 17:14, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

...also, Virginia Johnson died just as the first season was wrapping up production. Her lawyers would have been all over it had it been falsifiedEricl (talk) 23:38, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to see a section devoted to this issue, which is currently addressed only in the Premise section ("the series 'hangs on bones of fact'; 'it's more useful for the viewer to think of it as all made up. Because, mostly, it is...' "), in contradiction to Michelle Ashford's statement quoted above. John Link (talk) 00:56, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Why "American"?

It's produced by Sony, which is a Japanese company as far as I know. The main actors are British. It's first aired on Showtime, which I believe is an American company. However, why does this mean that the show is American? These seems to be not NPOV to me. --Rebroad (talk) 01:04, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

It's an American show because it was created, and is produced and aired for Showtime, an American cable network. It's produced by Sony Pictures Television, which is an American company. Nationality of actors is irrelevant. Not to sound rude, but the fact you ignorantly changed the lead to read "...is a British television series" just because it also airs in the UK clearly demonstrates you're unknowledgeable of how to classify TV shows. Here's a ref, even from the UK, stating "American drama". Drovethrughosts (talk) 01:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

The ref you mention isn't viewable without subscription, so it's not a suitable reference. When you find a suitable reference, please feel free to put it in the article, but until a reference is found, the citation needed tag is valid as per Wikipedia policy. If you are unclear on the relevant policy, please ask on here and someone can refer you to it. --Rebroad (talk) 16:29, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

I can view the link just fine, you don't need a subscription...it's a web link. A reference isn't need because there is no controversy. It's created, produced, and aired for American TV (Showtime). What do you not understand? The only time a television series' country of origin is in question is if it's co-financed or co-produced between two countries. If it's not an American show, what it is then? You obviously aren't very familiar with TV shows if you're questioning this. Here's another ref, again from the UK, as only non-American websites are going to mention its origin. Drovethrughosts (talk) 16:35, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Individual pages for each episode.

As you may have noticed, the first 3 episodes of the show have their own Wikipedia pages. I spoke to Let Me Eat Cake, who created those pages, and asked why he stopped after 3. He said that knowing he'd have to write a recap of each episode spoiled his enjoyment of the episodes. We both agree that the series should have individual pages for each episode, but I'm terrible at writing recaps. I could create the pages themselves, but someone else is going to write recaps. Zuko Halliwell (talk) 23:57, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Masters of Sex

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Masters of Sex's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "3premiere":

• From Masters of Sex (season 3): Mitovich, Matt Webb (March 25, 2015). "Masters of Sex, Ray Donovan Get Season 3 Premiere Dates". TVLine. Retrieved March 25, 2015.
• From List of Masters of Sex episodes: Mitovich, Matt Webb (March 25, 2015). "Masters of Sex, Ray Donovan Get Season 3 Premiere Dates". TVLine. Retrieved March 25, 2015.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 12:49, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Do you think anyone is going to accept that as an excuse? John Link (talk) 04:43, 25 February 2019 (UTC)