Talk:Queen America

Guest stars and recurring

On MOS:TVCAST, "A cast member or character appearing in more than one episode, or in two or more consecutive episodes, does not necessarily mean that character has a "recurring" role." — Lbtocth^talk 21:19, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Right. But you also left out the following sentence: "If reliable sources cannot adequately distinguish between recurring or guest roles, then local consensus should determine their status." The phrase local consensus would seem to suggest a consensus between those editors whom edit the article in question. Furthermore, the sentence you've cited above says "in more than one episode, or in two or more consecutive episodes". It does not say that three episodes is some sort of threshold for being considered recurring as has been suggested. That sentence is very much open to interpretation. In the way it currently is written, with the inclusion of the phrase "or more", one could argue that 5 appearances doesn't inherently mean someone recurs on a show or that 15 appearances doesn't inherently mean someone recurs on a show. The paragraph suggests that the determination should be left open to the discretion of the editors of the article in question. Honestly, whether or not an actor or character recurs largely depends on context. How big was the role? How many episodes? What significance did they play? Were the appearances consecutive or nonconsecutive? A blanket policy of the three or more doesn't take that context into account and would seem to be a large reason as to why the paragraph was written the way that it was. – BoogerD (talk) 21:49, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Again, the character has only appeared in 2 episodes. According to MOS:TVCAST, appearing in only 2 episode is almost never recurring. Where is the reliable source say that he is set to recur? IMDb is not a reliable source. — Lbtocth^talk 23:18, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

As it is currently written, the MOS does not explicitly state a threshold for a specific number of episodes needed to classify a cast member or character as recurring. Furthermore, the word "never" is not used at all. Rather, as I've stated above, the wording has been left vague as to provide guidance while still being open enough to to take into account specific context that varies from series to series (such as season length, screen time, significance in plot, etc.) One need only look at the many, many articles about television series to note that the barometer at which recurring and guest cast and characters are judged varies from page to page. No, a reliable source is not found here but it isn't needed. A three-episode rule doesn't exist as it currently written and WP:Primary covers the the full breadth of the section. A further discussion can be held here as to how one wants to classify the cast and characters in this specific article but it needs to be made clear as to what MOS:TV does, and does not, state. – BoogerD (talk) 23:20, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

I am waiting for other editors to join this discussion to reach a consensus. — Lbtocth^talk 23:27, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

See related discussion at: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television#Guest stars and recurring – the general consensus in WP:TV has always been that 2 episodes is almost never enough to qualify for "recurring" status, and even 3 episodes often doesn't cut it... A possible compromise is to put those that only appear twice or thrice in a 'Guest' section in the meantime, though some of us despise 'Guest' sections and think they're generally inappropriate. But if you can secondary source someone, then they can probably go in a 'Guest' section for now. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:42, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

BoogerD I am referring to the WikiProject Television. — Lbtocth^talk 00:08, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Though I am certain I could continue to debate here and argue my point as I've elaborated upon above, in the interest of moving on to other editing tasks on Wikipedia tonight and due to my exhaustion on this subject for today, I think I will go ahead and take the suggestion of comprise as stated above and WP:BEBOLD and move the character in question back to the guest sub-section for the time being. I hope that this will settle the issue as it relates to this article, for now at least. – BoogerD (talk) 00:38, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Furthermore, No, a reliable source is not found here but it isn't needed. is wrong because WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL. Again, IMDb is not a reliable source on Wikipedia. WP:Primary does not apply because it has not happen yet. — Lbtocth^talk 05:55, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Like I said, I'd prefer to put a pin in this discussion but since my words have been brought up, I'll make one more comment. My statement, and my overall position, was not debating as to whether reliable sources are needed for future casting information. Of course that is the case and sound Wikipedia policy. I was, however, debating what constitutes recurring and what currently supports one side or the other via Wikipedia policy or the Manual of Style. Basically, I was arguing that in the specific case of this article, the threshold had already been met. Either way, I have little interest in continuing the debate on my end for at least the short term future. – BoogerD (talk) 06:53, 4 December 2018 (UTC)