Talk:Robinson (TV series)

The table

To my fellow Wikipedians:
I have several disagreements with the table. I will list them below, in no particular order, in the effort that a previous contributor to the page (or someone else) will defend their existance.

1. It contains not just ER details, but other versions like Survivor which, although being born from the ER idea, is not the same thing. Anything non-ER must go.
2. It has far too many question marks (?), symbolising blank spaces. Several rows on the table consist of almost nothing but these blank spaces! They must also go, or be filled in.
3. Until I made it to the bottom of this enormous mammoth of a table, I had no idea what Strix is. This should be mentioned earlier. The section at the bottom should be expanded on, too.
4. Table is too large and hard to follow. It could possibly be broken up into smaller sections, or have huge hunks of it removed. (I vote for the second option).

You may ask, "why doesn't he just change it himself?". The answer is, I am aware that this is a relatively popular page, and I don't want to disturb it horrendously. This is why I am giving previous editors the chance to tell me what should stay, or fix it themselves.

Awaiting your response,
THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR (((¶))) 10:24, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Why must everything not named ER go? They are all the "children" of the original show, built upon the same concept. Does the name-change realy change things that much? The list seems to be the only one that tries to be a complete overview of the programs worldwide on Wiki. Mossig 18:54, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps I was too harsh in saying they must all go. What I mean is that we should separate the Survivor stuff and the ER stuff. After all, many of the shows e.g. the Australian, British, South African versions are copies of Survivor not Expedition Robinson. Although Survivor comes from ER these nations have chosen their versions to be Survivor-children not ER-children. ~~ THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR (((¶))) 00:10, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

And as US-Survivor is a copy of ER, that makes the other Survivor-versions grandchildren of ER. I am sorry, but I still don't see the reason for two lists: it will only make the matter more confused, as you will have to know what the show was called in a specific country to find it. Or if you would like to find out if a specific country has had a show based on the format you would have to search on two places instead of one. The difference is only in the name, not in the format. Mossig 10:21, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Merge with Survivor

I say merge this page with the Survivor page. Then have a separate page for each country's version. How do we set this up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.114.184.78 (talk • contribs)

What I was trying to get to, above (although maybe I didn't say it right), was that this article should be about the ORIGINAL Expedition Robibnson, with links to the relevant pages. Of course, we'd have to make the pages, and they'll probably be AfD'd or filled with information that in unverifiable and unreferencable. Do you have a copy of Season Two of Estonian Expedition Robinson? Can you find someone that does? And convince them to write an article on it? As Mossig pointed out above, the table is fine. THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR 10:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Removal of table

According to Collectonian the removal of the table ahs been discussed here - I can not find the discussion, and thus there is no sign of concensus. Please enlighten me.Mossig (talk) 20:20, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

The two discussions above note some of many problems with the tables and the article in general. In my removal, I noted some other important problems that lend themselves to just removing the tables all together. I'm not sure why you feel these tables are useful or helpful to the article. They are completely unsourced and appear to be pure original research. They also are not in keeping with the TV MOS. This article needs a lot of work to bring it up to the TV MOS standards, and removing those unnecessary tables is the first step. AnmaFinotera (talk) 20:27, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

The argument you put forward is not acording to wikipedia guidelines about removal and revertion, please read Wikipedia:Consensus. As the discussions above does not support your removal, I am surprised that you implemented it again without discussion. Please link to the MOS page you think are applicable. Mossig (talk) 20:41, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Two editors have now agreed the tables are inappropriate. The guidelines against unsourced material do allow for removal, without requiring consensus. The verifiability policy is a core wikipedia policy and comes above guidelines. The television article MOS is completely applicable to this article. The article needs to be about the television show Expedition Robinson, not just a table of purported copies. You can find it here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/How to write about television programs. AnmaFinotera (talk) 20:46, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Just for the record: "THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR" agreed that the tables could stay. And I find the MOS on television shows unsuitable for reality shows. I await your removal of the list in the Survivor article. Mossig (talk) 21:05, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

The Survivor article has a small table listing only true international Survivor versions. This article has a HUGE table proclaiming all of them were versions of this show, without any reliable sources to back up such wide sweeping claims. It was pure OR. You may feel that way, but the MOS still applies even if you do not like it. AnmaFinotera (talk) 23:42, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

But as some of the items in the list of the Survivor article are unreferenced, are they then not also OR and should be removed? (Just trying to understand the rules. AFAIK all the items in the list removed from the Exp. Robinson article were "true" international Robinson versions.) Mossig (talk) 23:50, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

The Survivor ones are fairly obvious, they are all Survivor: X version. The ones claimed in the table are not obvious versions. A listing of actual variants would be good, but this table is just a listing of every similar type show on the claim that all are based on this one show. That is neither good, nor necessary. Rather, a single paragraph (properly sourced) that discusses that this show has lead to the creation of many similar shows would be much better and more appropriate. AnmaFinotera (talk) 00:14, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry, but I fail to see the difference. (Especially as many of the versions in the removed list had the same name as the original.) But I am getting tired of defending things in Wikipedia against the barrage of "no reference listed, lets erase it!" edits. So I will let this rest now. Mossig (talk) 00:28, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the table. Not. Now I don't have all the complete information available whether it was reliable or not. 121.6.167.133 (talk) 14:15, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

The table on the Survivor (TV series) article now includes non-referenced items, (and items from the removed list of this article). I still await your action on that table to follow your actions on the table in this article. Mossig (talk) 21:53, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid argument, nor is "well this article did it so you better do it to." Nothing in that table was sourced, so it will not be added back. Provide verified sources for every last entry, or it doesn't belong. The onus is on the person wanting content to be included to provide the verification, else it is subject to removal, as it has been. AnmaFinotera (talk) 22:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

And my point really is that you have double standards: one for this article, and another one for the Survivor article. Thats all. Mossig (talk) 18:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Um, no, I don't work on the Survivor article and it doesn't have a gigantic table trying to claim every last survivor-style show in existence was based on this show. It is a very select list, almost all with the Survivor name in the titles, and not nearly as much extraneous and unnecessary info. I did tag the article as needing more references and possibly having OR issues. It has quite a few active editors, so I'll give it time to be fixed. I've told you before, if you want the table, find the sources. The burden is on the person wanting to have the information in an article to verify it and provide reliable sources if it has been challenged. AnmaFinotera (talk) 18:17, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

First Female Host

That Isn't True. Carla Constant, Was The Host Of Expedicion Robinson: La Isla VIP (Chilean Version). So Isacsson, Isn't The First Female Host Of Survivor-Expedition Robinson. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gonzalochileno (talk • contribs) 16:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Copyright problem

This article has been reverted by a bot to this version as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) This has been done to remove User:Accotink2's contributions as they have a history of extensive copyright violation and so it is assumed that all of their major contributions are copyright violations. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. VWBot (talk) 05:27, 10 December 2010 (UTC)