Talk:Trash Taste

Episode table

@Dkc195: I put the separate Special Guests sections in an episode table as the information provided under each heading was rather sparse Gnittopsniart (talk) 11:17, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

I think it’s better than before. Dkc195 (talk) 11:53, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Stripping out details of the podcast

@A Vexed Lens: I need to know what is the reasoning for removing details of the podcasts, specifically why eliminate lead host and short summaries? Other items I question is why remove the meaning of the Trash Taste name and why remove the one lead host, two color commentary hosts in format? --WashuOtaku (talk) 13:36, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

My personal reasoning was that the "lead host"/"directed by" part was completely unnecessary, as all three hosts have pretty much an equal amount of on-air time per episode. The only difference is that the "host" gets to sit in the "host chair," and does the intro at the beginning of the episode, but apart from that, there's really no difference at all. They certainly aren't "directing" the episode.

The short summaries were ridiculously un-encyclopedic and were full of in-jokes that non-listeners wouldn't get. I think that trying to summarize roughly two and a half hours of improvised content, usually with no real unifying theme, is an absurd task, and will lead to ridiculous nonsense like that seen in the article.

Finally, as for the meaning of "trash taste," it was straight up inaccurate. Initially, the article said something along the lines of "trash taste is slang for taste in anime that is considered bad," which is not at all the definition; it has nothing to do with anime. It combines the informal definition of "trash" as "cultural items, ideas, or objects of poor quality" with the definition of "taste" as "a person's tendency to like and dislike certain things."

If you (and the majority of editors) disagree with me, then some or all of these things can be added back. I will say, however, that the short summaries, if they are restored, should absolutely not be restored as they were initially, because, as I mentioned above, they were not encyclopedic in the slightest, and full of in-jokes that would go right over the head of someone who isn't a regular viewer/listener of the podcast.

A Vexed Lens (talk) 13:50, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this and just a reminder, to anyone reading, the reason the talk page exists is to avoid edit battles and be more collaborative. I do believe that we need to include the lead host and describe the format they are appearing to use, but at the same time they are all equally the hosts and each one can change the conversation as needed. I hope others can weigh-in on this more.

The short descriptions were mainly my idea and they did tend to get filled with in-jokes, so you are not wrong. I do feel a short description is needed to better explain most of the episodes (because the title often times is just a small part of it), but they also jump on many topics, which is difficult to summarize. So I am okay with the route your taking them at this time, but hope other editors will also weigh-in on this discussion too.

I am open to a better explanation/meaning for Trash Taste and feel that it is necessary to help explain to those not familiar with the phrase. Since I utterly failed at it, I hope another editor will take on that challenge. --WashuOtaku (talk) 14:32, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

@Washuotaku: Haha sorry, I didn't mean to be so hard on you, and don't be so hard on yourself, saying you "utterly failed." It's fine lol. I just think it's really cool that the pod has its own Wikipedia page now! But I wanted to make sure that it was still up to Wiki's standards. A Vexed Lens (talk)

Notability Issues

The only independent and reliable secondary sources that have more than a trivial mention of the subject in this article don't even mention a podcast called trash taste. The only secondary source that mentions the podcast is the mipon article, but it doesn't even contain WP:100WORDS. I would argue that if other sources can't be found that the podcast is not notable and that the article should be repurposed as GeeXPlus or merged into BookWalker. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:14, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

It is a little more difficult to get reliable secondary sources to talk about Anime, however to suggest that this podcast is not notable is simple ignorance of the fact. The podcast trio were recently interviewed at the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Japan; this is a legit event with legit organization confirming that Trash Taste exists and notable enough by other journalists in Japan; in future, I will incorporate these references into the article, but have not yet which is why they are in hidden text in article.

It is annoying that we are not getting experienced wiki editors to help improve the article and instead getting experienced wiki editors that want to remove the article. --WashuOtaku (talk) 16:58, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

@Washuotaku: if the podcast is not notable than deleting, moving, or merging the article would be helping to improve it. I still don't see how the podcast is notable even with these two sources you've presented. The first is clearly not independent as the article itself is selling tickets and the show was hosted at the website's venue giving it an obvious conflict of interest. The second is a youtube video, which generally aren't considered reliable, but it's also an WP:INTERVIEW so very little if any of it is considered a secondary source. Also, claiming that the sources demonstrate the existence of the subject does not make the podcast notable (i.e. WP:ITEXISTS), and it doesn't matter if the "trio" is notable because the podcast doesn't WP:INHERIT notability from its hosts. Would you like to merge the article with one of the above mentioned pages? I'll give it another search later today and if I can't find anything I'll probably open an AfD or at the very least begin a merge discussion. An AfD might generate the attention it needs for non-digital or non-free sources to be found and I think it would be beneficial to receive further input on the article, especially because the article has never been reviewed at AfC and it's never undergone any other review processes. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:22, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

I don't think I looked for any non-English sources so I'll probably start looking there. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:58, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: You should know I am absolutely against any merge discussion and flabbergasted of your dismissal of the FCCJ references. I have recently added back a few references that were blown away from an earlier version of the article that referenced several named guests that discussed their appearance on Trash Taste; hopefully the additional third party references will convince you that this is a notable podcast, despite of the niche subject matter. Of course, I will be happy if other editors help in improving the article, but not at the expense of removing the article. --WashuOtaku (talk) 18:36, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Moving the episode list to a separate article?

There's well over 220 episodes now and the list takes up a massive amount of screen real estate. There are (TV) shows with less than 25 episodes that have separate articles, shouldn't this episode list be moved to its own article as well?DragonFury (talk) 15:19, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

I am not against it. --WashuOtaku (talk) 15:21, 8 October 2024 (UTC)