Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television/August 2016 updates/PSE lead paragraphs

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Current text

• Shortcuts: WP:TVLEAD, WP:TVNOW

The lead paragraphs of an article should serve both as a quick introduction to the television show and a concise overview of the article itself, as per the Lead section style guideline. For television articles, the first paragraph should consist of basic information about the show, such as when the show first premiered, country, setting, genre(s), who created/developed the show, primary broadcasting station (typically the studio that produces the show), and when the show stopped airing (the first airing of the final episode).

In particular, the lead should avoid peacock words and superlatives. The phrase "award-winning" should not be used in the lead since it provides insufficient context to the reader; major awards and accolades received by the television show may be mentioned later in the lead using no more than a single sentence. The bulk of the lead should be an exposition of the show itself: theme, genre, setting, characters, style, and distinctive characteristics. A good example:

The Simpsons is an American animated sitcom created by Matt Groening for the Fox Broadcasting Company. It is a satirical parody of the middle class American lifestyle epitomized by its titular family, which consists of Homer, Marge, Bart, Lisa, and Maggie. The show is set in the fictional town of Springfield, and it lampoons many aspects of the human condition, as well as American culture, society as a whole, and television itself.

The subsequent paragraph(s) should summarize the major points of the rest of the article: basic production information (e.g. where the show is filmed), principal cast of the show, critical reception, influences, place in popular culture, major awards, and anything else that made the show unique.

References to the show, and its characters and locations, should be in the present tense since shows—even though no longer airing—still exist, including in the lead (e.g. Title is a...).

New, updated text

The lead paragraphs of an article should serve both as a quick introduction to the topic, and as a concise overview of the article itself, as per the Lead section style guideline. For example, an article on a television series should begin with basic information about the show, such as when it first premiered, genre(s) and setting, who created/developed the show, its primary broadcasting station (typically the studio that produces the show), and when the show stopped airing (the first airing of the final episode), etc. Genre classifications should be reliable sourced and comply with WP:WEIGHT and represent what is specified by a majority of mainstream reliable sources. If a series' nationality is singularly defined by reliable sources (e.g., being produced solely by American production companies), it should be identified in the opening sentence. If the nationality is not singular or unclear (e.g., produced by both American and British productions companies, as with Sherlock), omit the information from the introductory sentence and cover the different national interests later in the lead section.

A good example of a first paragraph:

The Simpsons is an American animated sitcom created by Matt Groening for the Fox Broadcasting Company. It is a satirical parody of the middle class American lifestyle epitomized by its titular family, which consists of Homer, Marge, Bart, Lisa, and Maggie. The show is set in the fictional town of Springfield, and it lampoons many aspects of the human condition, as well as American culture, society as a whole, and television itself.

Subsequent paragraph(s) should summarize the major points of the rest of the article: basic production information (e.g. where the show is filmed), principal cast of the show, critical reception, influences, place in popular culture, major awards, and anything else that made the show unique. The appropriate length of the lead section depends on the total length of the article. The length of the lead should conform to readers' expectations of a short, but useful and complete, summary of the topic. For appropriate length guidelines, please see WP:MOSLEAD#Length. A general rule of thumb is to write at least one sentence on each section of the article, though this will depend on the article itself. Information summarized in the lead should always be given due weight, so if an article has twice as much information on writing the series as it does filming it, the lead should also emphasize the writing.

The lead should avoid peacock words and superlatives. The phrase "award-winning" should not be used since it provides insufficient context to the reader; major awards and accolades received by the television show may be mentioned in the lead using no more than a single sentence. References to the show, and its characters and locations, should always be in the present tense, as the show will still exist even after it is no longer airing new episodes (e.g. Title is a...). In the case of some defunct non-fiction and live programs, most production and broadcast information should be referred to in past tense, however the program's existance should still be in present tense (eg. The Afternoon Show is a British talk show which was broadcast by Channel 1 between 2008 and 2011. The program was hosted by Susan Jones and John Smith and recorded in London).

Proposed changes

Proposal 1 - adamstom97 (talk)

The lead paragraphs of an article should serve both as a quick introduction to the topic, and as a concise overview of the article itself, as per the Lead section style guideline. For example, an article on a television series should begin with basic information about the show, such as when it first premiered, genre(s) and setting, who created/developed the show, its primary broadcasting station (typically the studio that produces the show), and when the show stopped airing (the first airing of the final episode), etc. A good example of a first paragraph:

The Simpsons is an American animated sitcom created by Matt Groening for the Fox Broadcasting Company. It is a satirical parody of the middle class American lifestyle epitomized by its titular family, which consists of Homer, Marge, Bart, Lisa, and Maggie. The show is set in the fictional town of Springfield, and it lampoons many aspects of the human condition, as well as American culture, society as a whole, and television itself.

Subsequent paragraph(s) should summarize the major points of the rest of the article: basic production information (e.g. where the show is filmed), principal cast of the show, critical reception, influences, place in popular culture, major awards, and anything else that made the show unique. A general rule of thumb is to write at least one sentence on each section of the article, though this will depend on the article itself. Information summarized in the lead should always be given due weight, so if an article has twice as much information on writing the series as it does filming it, the lead should also emphasize the writing.

The lead should avoid peacock words and superlatives. The phrase "award-winning" should not be used since it provides insufficient context to the reader; major awards and accolades received by the television show may be mentioned in the lead using no more than a single sentence. References to the show, and its characters and locations, should always be in the present tense, as the show will still exist even after it is no longer airing new episodes (e.g. Title is a...).

---

Proposal 1a - Just tacking this on, as I don't see need to change what you already have. But would like to add something on the length of the lead, as I see a lot of new or small articles with 3 and 4 paragraph leads. I would like to add this: "The appropriate length of the lead section depends on the total length of the article. The length of the lead should conform to readers' expectations of a short, but useful and complete, summary of the topic. For appropriate length guidelines, please see WP:MOSLEAD#Length."  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:32, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

---

Proposal 1b - To be added before the sentence "A good example..." This is copied from WP:FILMLEAD. "Genre classifications should be reliable sourced and comply with WP:WEIGHT and represent what is specified by a majority of mainstream reliable sources. If a series' nationality is singularly defined by reliable sources (e.g., being produced solely by American production companies), it should be identified in the opening sentence. If the nationality is not singular or unclear (e.g., produced by both American and British productions companies, as with Sherlock), cover the different national interests later in the lead section." - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:42, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

---

Proposal 1c - Following on from last paragraph re tense, something to the effect of: "In the case of some defunct non-fiction and live programs, most production and broadcast information should be referred to in past tense, however the program's existance should still be in present tense (eg. The Afternoon Show is a British talk show which was broadcast by Channel 1 between 2008 and 2011. The program was hosted by Susan Jones and John Smith and recorded in London)." In the given example (which anyone can feel free to shorten, lengthen or rewrite) I've put some key tense words in italics to better illustrate the point. -- Whats new?^(talk) 23:25, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Previous discussions

• Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television/Archive 1 some discussions on the lead for PSE articles, as well as using the present tense (TVNOW)
• Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television/Archive 2 more discussions regarding the use of the present tense, and if a series stylizes its title, if that should be included in the lead
• Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television/Archive 3 again, another discussion regarding the use of the present tense
• Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television/Archive 4 a discussion on including multiple nationalities in the lead and possibly pulling wording from WP:FILMLEAD on this (might be worth revisiting)

Relevant

• MOS:LEAD
• WP:FILMLEAD

Discussion

• I think this section is pretty good as a whole. It might be worth pulling wording used in WP:FILMLEAD regarding genre sourcing and use in the lead, as well as situations where multiple nationalities for production are involved. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:56, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
• I have a few suggestions for this one, so I've done up a proposal in the section above. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:31, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm happy to discuss further changes, this was just my thoughts on the content as it essentially already is. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:32, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

• I have an isue with the last paragraph "References to the show, and its characters and locations, should be in the present tense since shows—even though no longer airing" with regard to things like defunct talk shows or news programs. I agree it is proper for pre-recorded shows with fictional characters, but don't think it makes sense in other cases. For example, if The Afternoon Show is a cancelled talk program hosted by John Smith and Susan Jones, it doesn't really make sense to write the lead as "The Afternoon Show is a British talk show which aired from 2007 to 2010 on Channel 1 and is hosted by John Smith and Susan Jones." In this and similar cases, I think it should be permissable to phrase it "Show was a British...and was hosted by..." given a live program doesn't really still exist. I think past tense should perhaps be the standard for programs which are live or non-fictional. -- Whats new?^(talk) 23:20, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Are these live programs not recorded or made available in some form after their initial airing? Because even if they have just been archived somewhere but aren't available to the public then they do still exist. This would be a similar situation to all known copies of a book being destroyed, for which we would use past tense. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:25, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Fair point, that would have to be on a show-by-show basis, and perhaps difficult to prove. Perhaps it would be OK to still say "The Afternoon Show is a British talk show, but tense for remaining info be in past tense (eg. was hosted by, was broadcast nightly, the program discussed legal news - as opposed to is hosted by, is broadcast, the program discusses legal news). -- Whats new?^(talk) 23:28, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, whether it is still airing or not, we should refer to the acts of the production (filming, hosting, discussing, etc.) as having happened in the past. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:06, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Actually, I think if a program is still in production then present tense should be used for those things. If it is a live show still in production, than it is hosted by. If it is a live show since cancelled, then it should be changed to was hosted by. -- Whats new?^(talk) 00:36, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

I just meant past production. As in, we shouldn't say that an old episode still exists and is live, we say it was live, and still exists. If that makes sense. I think we are in agreement anyway, so do you have an idea of what we could say on this? - adamstom97 (talk) 01:07, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

@Whats new?: Some of the archives I added in the "Previous discussions" section above discussed the use of the present tense, so that might prove helpful. I agree with what you are saying, so maybe there is additional wording needed to clarify in the instances you are referring to that should be in the past tense. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:12, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Oh yes sorry, my misunderstanding. Perhaps just adding to existing text, such as "References to the show, and its characters and locations, should always be in the present tense, as the show will still exist even after it is no longer airing new episodes (e.g. Title is a...). There is an exception for non-fiction or live programming, where production and hosting information should be referred to in past tense while the program's existance is referred to in present tense (eg. Title is a television show which was hosted by...)." Something like that anyway? -- Whats new?^(talk) 01:17, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

No worries. Something like that would be acceptable in my eyes. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:19, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps a real world example (like The Simpsons example) would help for clarity with a non-fiction or live news/panel/talk show to better illustrate this after the description. -- Whats new?^(talk) 01:22, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps an example like that on The Oprah Winfrey Show:

The Oprah Winfrey Show, often referred to simply as Oprah, is an American syndicated tabloid talk show that aired nationally for 25 seasons from September 8, 1986 to May 25, 2011 in Chicago, Illinois. Produced and hosted by its namesake, Oprah Winfrey, it remains the highest-rated talk show in American television history.

given it meets the traditional requirements of a lead (premiere, genre, setting, host, broadcaster (in this case syndication) and finale, but also demonstrates the use of past tense except for "the show is") -- Whats new?^(talk) 04:06, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

If you're going to change tenses, just make sure not to do it in the same sentence. You cannot say: "X is a show that aired and 'was' hosted by." because you need tense agreement in a sentence. You would have to remember to separate the statements that change tense.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:27, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

• Quick note. When we do proposals, can we bold the changed text so that we don't have to read original and new text over and over again to figure out what was changed? Just a helpful suggestion. :)  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:24, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Fine by me! @Adamstom.97: could you do that too yours to highlight the differences? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:29, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Do you want me to bold any text that is different? Or just new additions? My proposal rearranges a whole lot of stuff, but not much of it is actually new content. Also, I can add this new stuff fron Whats new? and Bignole about tenses if you want, or I could just make a new proposal that combines everything we have so far. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:08, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Feel free to add my proposals to yours, I just wanted to flesh it out a bit first. With regards to Bignole on 'tense agreement' I understand what you're saying, however it is difficult to do. Even the first sentence of the existing The Simpsons example changes tense and it is a current show: "The Simpsons 'is' (present tense) an American animated sitcom 'created' (past tense) by Matt Groening..." So, for consistency, either that is disallowed (and I dare say most articles are written somewhat like that which would require changing) or "X 'is' a show that 'aired' and 'was' hosted.." would have to be acceptable as well. -- Whats new?^(talk) 22:15, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

• Quick drive-by comment here, but I like the suggestions made so far by Adamstom.97 and Bignole. And I agree with some of the tensing points made by Whats new?... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:39, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
• Sorry all. This slipped my mind a bit. Any last minute comments/concerns? Only other think I'd possibly like to discuss as I mentioned in my first bullet here, is if wording should be added regarding genres in the lead and stating co-productions, similar to how FILMLEAD suggests. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:52, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

I think those would be good adds for the section. I don't have any preferences on wording. - adamstom97 (talk) 06:20, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

I've added a proposal 1b to address what I think should be added. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:43, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

@Favre1fan93: Please include some kind of "shout out" to MOS:INFOBOXFLAG in mentioning the nationalities in the infobox. One of the things that drives me batty is when editors insist upon using flag icons rather than properly spelling out "United States", "Canada", "United Kingdom", etc. in infobox parameters like this (though I see this more in Film articles than TV ones...). So I'd really love it if MOS:TV was very clear that flagicons in the infobox are a 'No-no'. Thanks! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:29, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

This is more appropriate in the infobox section, which we've already covered. But I'll add it in to that section, because I don't think this will be controversial. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:55, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

If there's no further discussions or proposals, are we about ready to close and move onto the next section? -- Whats new?^(talk) 06:58, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Wow. Thanks Whats new? I did what I said I didn't want to do: forgot a bit about this. Yes I think so. I just want to give a final ping to AlexTheWhovian and Drmargi regarding my 1b proposal regarding listing multi-country productions in the lead, because both have dealt with some resistance regarding indicating this with some British-American productions, and I'd like to give them a chance to express their thoughts/comments/opinions on the wording I proposed if they choose. We can conclude after that and move on. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:06, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

So, that is, concerning the section that states "If the nationality is not singular (e.g., produced by both American and British productions companies, as with Sherlock), cover the different national interests later in the lead section."? So, Sherlock would use this: "Sherlock is a crime drama television series based on Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes detective stories. [...Extra content...] [...Content concerning production with both American and British productions companies...]"? I see no issue with that. It might even cut down on the disagreeance by those who believe it should be entirely one nationality based on their own views. (Even though they might later try to add "Sherlock is a British crime drama television series" to the lead, as an example.) Perhaps, it'd be best to change it to If the nationality is not singular or unclear (e.g., produced by both American and British productions companies, as with Sherlock), cover the different national interests later in the lead section.? Alex|The|Whovian^? 03:15, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Exactly Alex. I will add in unclear as you suggested too. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:47, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm basically happy to have this stuff added in once everyone else is. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:38, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Ditto -- Whats new?^(talk) 01:02, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

For the sake of making it unambiguous, I'd probably say that if the nationality is not singular or is unclear, omit the information from the introductory sentence and present details later. This will make it more obvious that we don't want hyphenations. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:14, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

I've added the "omit" text Cyphoid. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:17, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

• Alright. I've combined everyone's proposals into the "New text" section. Adamstom.97's proposal is the basis of the new text, with Bignole's proposal added in the second paragraph after the Simpsons example. My proposal, with slight text adjustments from others, was added into the first paragraph, and Whats new?'s added at the very end. I think this is all good, so in my next edit, I will close, and copy over into the MOS. And then it's on to the next one, everyone's favorite, plot!! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:17, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.