Talk:People of Earth

UFO factual references

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_of_Earth_(TV_series)#External_links

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-mack/astronomers-ufo_b_1901480.html

https://www.reddit.com/r/uap — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.0.92.173 (talk) 14:41, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

• CLAIM: IF Chase Brandon is at all associated with this art, THEN the entire thing is CIA psyops. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.0.92.173 (talk) 15:24, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Edited by someone who has had sex with 1 of the writers. YES this is CIA psychological operations. This is a fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.1.62.47 (talk) 23:33, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

50.0.92.173 / 50.1.62.47 - Are you using this Talk Page as an opportunity to push a personal agenda or are you implying that People of Earth is a documentary? Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 17:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

H. Jon Benjamin

I don't believe the policeman character is an alien. I seem to remember that he is a human in their employ. Anyone else? Bradeos Graphon Βραδέως Γράφων (talk) 05:20, 25 January 2017 (UTC) Bradeos Graphon Βραδέως Γράφων (talk) 05:20, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

This is correct. Benjamin's character is a human in alien employ. Laodah 05:43, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Unorthodox marketing coup

POE has gone down in media history for its use of YouTube "advertising" to bring the entire first episode (a 22-minute pre-roll "advert") to viewers of other, unrelated videos. I myself was one of thousands -- probably millions -- of unsuspecting YouTube surfers brought to the series this way. I later read that this was an unprecedented use and triumph of Internet advertising. (Specifically, that they streamed an entire episode as unsolicited advertising, structured that episode to rivet viewers' attention quickly, like an ordinary YouTube advert, and then held it for an incredible 22 minutes, when viewers had come expressly to watch something else.) Seems like that's notable and should be added, by someone who isn't me. Laodah 05:43, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 8 August 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus DrStrauss talk 19:17, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

---

People of Earth (TV series) → People of Earth – As the album of the same name has little notability on Wikipedia, I proposed a merge for all of Doctor Steel's albums into his main article. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:4556:FA74:B23C:37BD (talk) 04:45, 8 August 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. No such user (talk) 08:24, 21 August 2017 (UTC)--Relisting. TheSandDoctor (talk) 16:59, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose we blank five album articles because a TV comedy with the same name as one of them has come out? In ictu oculi (talk) 09:49, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Having said that though the main reason for opposing is the people (small p) of Earth should really redirect to humans. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:38, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

• Support. This is far and away the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC in a WP:TWODABS situation, even in the present setup with the album having its own article. The TV series receives 99.7% of the page views.[1] There are no other articles titled "People of Earth" and I'm not convinced readers are really searching for human with the search term "People of Earth". That phrase isn't mentioned in the humans article, and is mostly known from old sci fi movies.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:51, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose. The primary topic for the plain title "people of Earth" is either Human or Ethnology, not any popular culture artifact. 64.105.98.115 (talk) 11:07, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
• Support per Cuchullain. Humans are hardly the primary encyclopedic topic for "People of Earth" – not "what first comes to (your) mind". I find it unbelievable that anyone looking for Human would use this phrase to find the information. From the rest, the TV series satisfies the WP:PTOPIC criteria of much more likely than any other topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term. No such user (talk) 10:56, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 20 December 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. After 21 days and two relistings it appears that a consensus has been garnered. Happy New Year to All! (closed by page mover)  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  10:56, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

---

• People of Earth (TV series) → People of Earth
• People of Earth → People of Earth (disambiguation)

– I would like to try this move request again, because now that the 2007 album has been merged into Doctor Steel, this clearly is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. In the last move request, a user said the primary topic is basically humans. That is not true at all, as we do not constantly refer to ourselves as "people of Earth". I do not mind humans staying on the dab page, but by far, this is the primary topic. JE98 (talk) 20:04, 20 December 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 21:35, 27 December 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. ToThAc (talk) 18:30, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose, either 'humans' or 'humanity'. I'd personally include all lifeforms as people of earth. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:06, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
• Support I highly doubt that somebody looking for an article on humanity would use People of Earth as their search term. JDDJS (talk) 02:52, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

• Since you're guessing I'll suggest a possibly often-repeated scenario where a innocent wide-eyed child (or deer) uses the term as a descriptor, and then finds the term 'Human', and thus learns the 'correct' name (although Robert Anton Wilson's says, paraphrased, that only one human out of a thousand knows that insects are people too). "People of Earth" seems primarily to be a descriptor, so the redirect to 'human' makes the most sense per common and most familiar name. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:55, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

• So in your scenario, somebody is capable of reading, writing and using the internet before they hear the term human? We don't cater to things that are that unlikely. JDDJS (talk) 13:05, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Even in this hypothetical and very unlikely scenario, the reader would find a hat note for the other uses if they were redirected to the primary topic. But we shouldn't make decision based on hypothetical and very unlikely scenarios.--Cúchullain ^t/c 16:58, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose, again WP:ASTONISH WP:CRITERIA and book usage. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:45, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
• Strong support. Very obvious WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The TV show gets *99.7%* of the page views,[2] and is currently the only topic of this name with its own article, or coverage at any other article. "People of Earth" is simply not an encyclopedic search term for human. No one would ever type in or click on that phrase expecting it to point there. Let's have some common sense here.--Cúchullain ^t/c 16:56, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
• Support per Cuchullain's page view stats. I find the idea that readers really mean "human" in general to come to such a specific term unlikely. SnowFire (talk) 18:53, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
• Support, clear primary topic. I do not believe anyone would ever visit an article titled "People of Earth" and be astonished at finding a TV series. —Xezbeth (talk) 18:55, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose Per WP:ASTONISH. It just strikes me as too common a saying to make the TV show the primary topic._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 10:32, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose There is an album with the same name and there is no way this show can be considered the primary topic LovelyAngle (talk) 21:44, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

• The "album" is from an Internet-only artist and former busker who gets around 70 hits a day ([3]). There is no content in Doctor Steel that is actually about said album other than saying it exists: no reviews, no tracklist, no development, no reception, nothing. As a stand-alone article, it would be a single sentence long and surely deleted. SnowFire (talk) 22:22, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

• Support, as this is the only topic in the encyclopedia with an article at this title. bd2412 T 22:44, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

• Yes, but WP:ASTONISH does exist, and this seems to fall into the description. At least it surprised me that this page is the primary. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:18, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

• Comment A lot of people have been bringing up WP:ASTONISH as a reason to not move this page. However, after reading it multiple times, I can't see how that applies here at all, as long as we include the hatnote to the disambiguation page. JDDJS (talk) 15:07, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
• Support We're not catering to aliens. The song is clearly not the PTOPIC per page views. A hatnote is enough to no be afoul of WP:ASTONISH. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:49, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
• Support based on current articles in the encyclopedia. If there could be a well-referenced page about the history of the phrase, I could see it usurping the TV show as the primary topic. As it stands, a hatnote should suffice to alleviate reader confusion. Ost (talk) 16:32, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
• Support. There's no other article using the title, and not many people will be astonished considering the dab page gets only 2% as many views as the TV series. Station1 (talk) 07:11, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

• Support per nom. If, in the future, a POV issue arises vis-à-vis peoples not of the Earth, the issue can be addressed at that time. —  AjaxSmack  22:50, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.