Jump to content

Talk:Golden Age of Television (2000s–present)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Enough already

[edit]

We currently have about 245 shows listed, not counting the 36 "Pre-1999 shows associated with the contemporary Golden Age" (whatever that's supposed to do for us). Considering that the section heading is "Selected notable and important shows" (emphasis added by me), could we agree that the list is already plenty long (I consider it to be way too long) and stop adding new shows? We don't want to run afoul of WP:INDISCRIMINATE, but the sheer length of this list, even split into 4 or 5 columns as I usually view it on my desktop, is surely overwhelming for many readers.

Espngeek, you've been the main contributor here lately. What do you think about reducing the addition of, or even pruning some of the shows listed? — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 12:44, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to exclude a lot of good shows, so I say let's leave it as it is. Espngeek (talk) 12:59, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. But that said, as of now there shouldn't be many more shows to add, since a great many are already listed. As long as we ensure that, going forward, shows being added have a solid source attached, there shouldn't be any problems. Meanwhile, the growth of the page should slow significantly. (jmho) - wolf 03:32, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I will leave it to the established editors to determine where is best, but mention should be made of _The Americans_. The show's own Wiki page includes numerous examples of the overwhelming critical approval received. 2601:2C0:8B80:C480:A17F:93:C6FD:4535 (talk) 09:24, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Essay-like

[edit]

In addition to the aforementioned needlessly long list, this article mostly consists of glossing over thinkpiece-type secondary sources with "[author] says that [talking point" without elaborating on any of them. This style is much more suited to a bad term paper than an encyclopedic article, and plenty of these citations clearly misrepresent what are already tentative and hypothetical ideas ("prestige TV" directly caused the WGA strike? that's not at all what that opinion column says). The edit history shows Mr. Espngeek running hog wild with his own idea of what the article should look like, which seems to draw more on the too-cute-by-half style of writing you find on fandom wikis than anything on this site. Musiceasel (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 17:09, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Musiceasel: Unfortunately, articles like this rely on subjective opinions, to the point where interpreting opinion pieces is unavoidable and an inherent part of the discussion. What I, in my edits to the article, have attempted to do is pull a broad variety of such pieces from various reputable publishers to indicate a consensus, inasmuch as one can be achieved. (What constitutes quality, golden, etc. is subjective, of course. There's no way to PROVE such a thing, only to build a consensus on what most people THINK is/are such.) J. Myrle Fuller (talk) 00:01, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 25 November 2023

[edit]
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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. (non-admin closure) Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 21:53, 28 December 2023 (UTC) Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 21:53, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Golden Age of Television (2000s–present) → Peak TV – As a growing consensus is building—substantial enough that even if it is not yet majority (though I would argue by 2023 that it is), it is more than enough to conclude there is no longer a consensus that it remains ongoing—that the age has ended, continuing to have "present" in the article title is no longer appropriate. J. Myrle Fuller (talk) 23:57, 25 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 17:59, 3 December 2023 (UTC) Adjusting' to reflect change in consensus from original proposal ("Golden Age of Television (early 21st century)") after discussion. J. Myrle Fuller (talk) 22:36, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's best to present as many options as possible to rename this article, seeing as there's already other names in the lead section to disambiguate it. "New", "Second", or "Third" and all. Not sure how there could be three Golden Ages so I propose New Golden Age of Television as the most fitting if a renaming is decided. Carlinal (talk) 01:01, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How about just naming it Peak TV? Espngeek (talk) 16:11, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm fine with that and Prestige TV. Only problem for me is which of these names is the most primary. I don't have much of a problem with "Golden Age of Television (early 21st century)" either, though I think it is unnecessarily long and doesn't seem the best way to disambiguate from the first Golden Age. Carlinal (talk) 21:53, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To @JMyrleFuller and @Espngeek, I did a check around the article and Peak TV is the most prominent name used in references (excuse the conflictedness in my private life for not doing this earlier), I'm certain this is the most appropriate new title. Any more thoughts and objections? Carlinal (talk) 20:08, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No objections at all. Also, List of shows considered as Peak TV. You're welcome. :) Espngeek (talk) 20:53, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I forgot I watch this article too lol, even better Carlinal (talk) 05:14, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I will change the suggested page move since that appears to be the consensus we're reaching. J. Myrle Fuller (talk) 22:36, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When is the move? Espngeek (talk) 01:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm assuming when the admins/bot get(s) around to it. J. Myrle Fuller (talk) 01:57, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Moved it :) Espngeek (talk) 02:21, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Espngeek Could we also move this talk page, too? J. Myrle Fuller (talk) 03:20, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Espngeek, I have reverted your cut-and-paste move. You have to wait for at least one week after relisting. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:36, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'll let you change the article from Golden Age of Television (2000s-present) to simply Peak TV (or Prestige TV). I already done my part with the sources and the suggestion of the article's new name alongside the list of shows considered to be part of the Peak TV canon. Espngeek (talk) 04:37, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Should we have a separate article for prestige TV because half those shows (e.g NCIS) are not widely considered to be prestige TV.
Question is, is peak TV a more widely used synonym for prestige TV (in the common vernacular) or is peak TV entirely separate to prestige TV itself? HarryQuartz (talk) 12:31, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't particularly care WHAT the new name is; the proposed name simply keeps consistency with the current one while still maintaining the blurry boundaries, and dodging any questions over "New" (which, like almost all things named "New," will eventually be outdated by the next newer thing), or second/third (though given the sources, the use of Third appears to be a very small minority, given the definition of the proposed Second being so brief and largely unrecognized by other sources). I don't object to Peak TV (which already redirects there), though that term seems to be more closely associated with the latter part of the era than the whole period. J. Myrle Fuller (talk) 21:37, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you prefer Prestige TV? Espngeek (talk) 04:43, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think "Prestige TV" is an appropriate title for the article, and I don't think "also known as Prestige TV" is appropriate for the lede either. Most sources seem to make clear that, while "Peak TV", like "Golden Age", is a time period or state of affairs, "Prestige TV" refers to a genre or category of show that rose to prominence during the Peak TV era. Really I think "Prestige television" should be a different article entirely. AJD (talk) 14:22, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Both Peak and Prestige TV overlap each other Espngeek (talk) 14:50, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think peak and prestige TV both overlap because if they did then shows such as NCIS wouldn't be included in the list located in the article.
NCIS can be reasonably believed to be peak TV but not prestige TV,
Concur with AJD that prestige TV should be allowed an article page. HarryQuartz (talk) 12:25, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Some dispute that this Golden Age started way earlier in the late 20th century. Espngeek (talk) 04:37, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep "Golden Age of Television", I'm ok with dabs such "Second Golden Age", "The Next Golden Age", or "21st Century Golden Age", etc., etc. - wolf 06:01, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Alongside "Peak TV" and "Prestige TV" Espngeek (talk) 13:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am not still undecided whether it should be moved, but I think that the (2000s–present) should be removed as it is unlikely that sources or the community will ever agree if it has ended or which year it ended/will end. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 11:40, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • And inasmuch as there is any dispute as to whether it's still going, and considering the increasingly overwhelming sentiment that it has ended, any indication in the title that it is still present (indicating certainty that it's still ongoing) does need to be removed. Unfortunately, it appears we're headed toward a "no consensus" situation that's quite awkward: we all agree it needs to change, but we can't agree on the new page name—yet the current name is the most unacceptable of all! I will again suggest the "2000s–present" portion be replaced with "early 21st century" as I originally proposed, retaining the general beginning as the original article, but no longer stating that it's ongoing. If only as a temporary fix until we can agree on a consensus. J. Myrle Fuller (talk) 20:07, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep "Golden Age of Television", but support replacing disambiguator with "early 21st century" / "21st century". Happily888 (talk) 10:22, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move I would keep it if calling it " Golden Age of Television (early 21st century)" would exclude the fact that it started in "late 20th century"; "Peak TV"/"Prestige TV" are more easier to describe. Espngeek (talk) 17:47, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to Peak TV, just to confirm from me. Carlinal (talk) 17:54, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. “Peak TV” is good headlinese, but good headlinese is not a good scholarly title, and in particular here is not accurate. “Peak TV” is not defined the same as “Golden Age”, let alone “2000 to present”. Peak TV is necessarily a smaller period than “Golden Age”, if not a president single date, and I recommend a section to be devoted to “Peak TV”. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:05, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just let the article be where it is now. Espngeek (talk) 00:45, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Question about having a section for Peak TV

[edit]

What are the true differences between "current Golden Age" and "Peak" TV? Espngeek (talk) 17:44, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Golden_Age_of_Television_(2000s–present)&oldid=1258452026"