Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television

From Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Television (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 
Stock post message.svg To-do list for Wikipedia:WikiProject Television: edit·history·watch·refresh· Updated 2017-07-07

To do list:
Major discussions/events:
Incubators:

You Wrote It, You Watch It[edit]

Noob here... I have 8 episode names for Jon Stewart's early show on MTV, "You Wrote It, You Watch It". The article on the show is currently a stub. What is the method for adding this information to the article?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_Wrote_It,_You_Watch_It

I have the episodes on tape so I know the episode names are correct, however, I don't know the air dates, nor does the show appear to have a production code for each episode. This info seems to be common in episode lists for TV shows on Wikipedia. The recordings do have full credits so key production personnel could be listed/tagged.

"Template:Netflix original ended series" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Template:Netflix original ended series. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 25#Template:Netflix original ended series until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. — YoungForever(talk) 14:01, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Editors are still needed to weigh in on this. It was relisted twice already. — YoungForever(talk) 15:31, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Next (2020 TV series)[edit]

I need some pairs of eyes on the articles. Several IP addresses and not autoconfirmed or confirmed editors have disruptive editing by changing airdates against the reliable sources. — YoungForever(talk) 18:48, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Wouldn't this be solved by getting the page protected? If IPs are being disruptive you could request it. 81.96.245.175 (talk) 19:38, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
I’ve already requested 30/500 (extended confirmed) protection as the disruption is caused by an autoconfirmed user. D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 20:13, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
Update: It is semi-protected by an admin for two months. — YoungForever(talk) 01:47, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

List of I, Claudius episodes[edit]

Should this be merged into I, Claudius (TV series)?... I really can't think of any reason why it shouldn't be. Comments? --IJBall (contribstalk) 00:46, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Absolutely. There's not enough episodes to split per MOS:TVSPLIT and Wikipedia:Article splitting (television). -- /Alex/21 00:48, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Definitely, 1 season consisted only 12 episodes is not enough to split at all. — YoungForever(talk) 01:08, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Presentation of dead characters[edit]

Does the community have an opinion about how we present information when a character is depicted as dying in a series? I run into articles all the time like this, where in the overview you'll see:

  • Bharat Tyagi(Bade, alive)/Shatrughan Tyagi(Chote, dead)

And in the cast section you'll see:

  • Vikrant Massey as Bablu Pandit ... (Season 1, dead)
  • Divyendu Sharma as Phoolchand Tripathi ... (Season 1-2, dead)

To me, including all these "dead"s feels a bit weird, as if we're treating fictional shows the way we treat Big Brother, by indicating everybody who's been evicted. And in Indian entertainment articles there is a hyper-fixation on labeling everything, so I might be over-sensitive to that. But if we track the entire path a character takes, I could see an argument for keeping them. In some cases though, like with the overview, it seems silly to indicate who died before we even get into the meat and potatoes of who the characters and cast are. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:27, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

That doesn't seem appropriate, and neither does the seasonal part. That's up there with episode counts, which we say not to list. If it's relevant, it should be presented in prose content with context.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:31, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Actually, when it comes to longer-running shows that have large revolving casts where actors may move from recurring to main or vice versa (The Walking Dead (TV series) being a key example) I see no issue with identifying the season's that person's been on, as long as there is some prefunctionary text to explain this to a degree. --Masem (t) 16:47, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Totally agree – listing what seasons various characters/actors appear in is totally relevant, encyclopedic information (and MOS:TVCAST even explicitly allows for it). Again, the reason episode counts are not to be included as per the MOS is because they are generally unverifiable, not because that information is not somehow "relevant"... As to the question at hand, I think including info about when/why a character leaves a TV series is relevant info, but it should not be presented as shown above. I generally think the appropriate way to handle something like that is along the lines of:
  • Johnny Depp as Sheriff Bill MacGuffin (seasons 1–2): MacGuffin is Somewhereville's intrepid sheriff who investigates the kidnappings of several local children. He is killed in the second season finale, "The Great Reveal", when he discovers the kidnappers' lair and is shot in the ensuing melee.
Something like this – explaining why a character is no longer there, or no longer on a show, strikes me as a totally appropriate use of a character summary. If there is no proper prose character summary, but just a simple cast list, then it should simply be listed as something like Johnny Depp as Sheriff Bill MacGuffin (seasons 1–2). --IJBall (contribstalk) 18:00, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Maybe if a character's death is a driving factor for a show, that if you were trying to summary a show within a few hundred words would be essential to explain the show (eg Laura Palmer in Twin Peaks as her death is a show driver), but in a case like the Walking Dead where character death is very common, this could be omitted. --Masem (t) 18:18, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
In some contexts, it may make more sense to put the info in the episode summaries. But a "He dies in the third season finale." or "She leaves town in the fourth season finale." strikes me as relevant info in a character summary to explain why a character/actor is no longer on a show. --IJBall (contribstalk) 19:54, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
I concur as well. But want to add that it is also common practice to include the seasons of the characters have been on. — YoungForever(talk) 18:46, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
No, this should not be added. The tenure of a actor/character on a show is fair, but their fate is unnecessary. --Masem (t) 16:43, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Good examples of List of programs broadcast by [network name][edit]

Are there any good examples of a well-crafted "List of programs broadcast by <network name>"? I just need one or two. Alternatively, an example or two of a decent TV network article that might also include programming tables. I have an issue at Surya TV and I don't think the other editor has likely seen what a quality article of this sort is supposed to look like. This one has a weird # of episodes column with content like "207+/1353". ??? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:38, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

I also would like an answer to this – it will be very useful if we can point to one of these articles and say "This is an example of how you want to do an article like this.", as well as a bad example so as to say, "You definitely don't want to do the article this way..." --IJBall (contribstalk) 19:56, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

"Upcoming redirects" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Upcoming redirects. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 9#Upcoming redirects until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. — YoungForever(talk) 17:42, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Game of Thrones peer review[edit]

Hello all, Game of Thrones has an open peer review subpage in preparation for a possible featured article nomination, see Wikipedia:Peer review/Game of Thrones/archive5. Of course, any comments and feedback to improve the article are welcome and encouraged. Thank you! -- LuK3 (Talk) 22:14, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Does every page need a ratings table?[edit]

With TVbythenumbers dead and Programming Insider not publishing any DVR ratings data since August 15 there's nothing to put in them. Variety seem to be completely random when they do releases and even then those are for broadcast shows and not cable. There's no other source online as far as I know which publishes these numbers.

Without wanting to sound like I'm rambling should tables with at least five or six weeks of no DVR numbers be deleted or hidden? Nielsen releases these numbers weekly but if no website can be bothered to publish why clutter pages with empty DVR tables? 81.96.245.175 (talk) 13:50, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

The answer is no. Especially with recent series, the odds are old-style ratings will be meaningless, and so these kinds of series almost certainly don't need ratings tables. Indeed, they may not even need a ratings column in the episodes table. --IJBall (contribstalk) 15:00, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Not necessary. If there is a Ratings DVR table, it should be hidden for now until there are DVR ratings for the DVR table. — YoungForever(talk) 15:36, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
FWIW, The Hollywood Reporter's ratings might be helpful. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:41, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
But, by the same token, if it becomes clear that meaningful (i.e. more than just a minor scattering of data) DVR ratings will never be forthcoming, it should ultimately be removed/deleted. --IJBall (contribstalk) 15:42, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Many thanks favre1fan93 that solves the broadcast table issue. I'll start updating tables later today. 81.96.245.175 (talk) 15:55, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Programming Insider has resumed publishing DVR data, at least for Live+3. Check the "final ratings" articles. As noted above, The Hollywood Reporter has also regularly reported Live+3 since the TV season started. Data is also occasionally given in network press releases (especially ABC). While it's less than it used to be, there is not a lack of data. Heartfox (talk) 17:10, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

In Treatment (American TV series) requested move[edit]

Please see this discussion, thanks. -- Wikipedical (talk) 15:13, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Does anyone here understand Polish?[edit]

Rodzinka.pl is a new article accepted at AfC today. A lot of cleanup has been done but there are some outstanding tasks that need to be completed. The first is the infobox, which appears to have been copied straight from the Polish Wikipedia. I have moved the Polish text to the talk page since I don't understand Polish (ironic since my dearly departed wife of 35 years was Polish) and I have replaced it with our infobox. The article needs various fixes in other areas as well but the biggest problem is the Polish infobox. Help fixing this would be appreciated. --AussieLegend () 17:28, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

A billing status matter at Legend of the Seeker[edit]

We need opinions on the following matter: Talk:Legend of the Seeker#Craig Parker's Billing Status.

Favre1fan93, Masem, Bignole, and/or Alex 21, can we get your help on this on the article talk page? Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 19:36, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

This is not a matter of "opinions". All anyone needs to do is watch the opening credits of a season 2 episode with Craig Parker and they'll see he was billed a guest star. I checked myself and that's why I made the edit. Bluerules (talk) 20:02, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Notability of Draft:The Wacky Word Show[edit]

Note: I removed the text, it was a copy of the official web site.

Anyone from Canada familiar with this show? Is it notable?

It has supposedly won "Best Performance Children's or Youth Non-Fiction Program or Series Best Performance Children's or Youth Fiction Program or Series" but there's no citation, and the official web site doesn't make that claim.

If it's a no-name TV show I'll reject the draft outright even though it hasn't been submitted yet. If the topic might be notable, then please help improve the draft.

By the way, the publicity image in the draft and other publicity images uploaded by the uploader to the Commons are likely copyright violations, I've tagged them as such, so they will probably disappear in a week. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:29, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Color Table design (urgent help required) for Idol[edit]

For editors in the group, we need help to complete the change of color template design in all articles so that it will reflect the way it currently presented in the post-ABC era (season 16 and later). Up until now, most editors had done most of the maintenance work but up until the pre-live show stage on August (for season 4), and no work has done yet up until now. If you are seeing this, please help do your best to make it consistent and help with the updates of the color schemes. This goes the same for the other seasons until season 15 (the pre-FOX era) as well, and other Idol season as well.

The color design was more contrast and bright, and so far it has been used in other shows such as SPOP Sing! (season 1) (so far only one show has done that using the template, for the record). The reason for the change is because that the blue box saying elimination and the gray header are not properly contrast and a bold typeface is heavily used for elimination. The colorful design is much more appealing, appropriate, and consistent like the one used for displaying results in other singing reality shows such as The Voice (American TV series) and The X Factor (British TV series).

I just want to look for editors to help because I (plus some other editors) am busy. Thanks for lending a hand. TVSGuy (talk) 09:01, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

When to add project to filmography?[edit]

Though this might be more of a biographical question, but when do we typically add a future television event to someone's filmography? If an actor is slated to appear in a film, we typically don't add that credit until filming begins. For television work, do we add that when they start taping, or once the thing airs? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:42, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Correct, basically as per WP:NFF. If it's simply been "announced", you can put it in the article prose (sourced), but only there. Once it starts filming, then you can add it to the Filmography (and that should be sourced to verify that filming has begun). And, even then, I would argue it's not strictly necessary to add it to the Filmography even at that point – really, there's no good reason not to wait until a release date has been announced as per WP:NOHURRY and WP:NOTNEWS. --IJBall (contribstalk) 01:55, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
I think what you're asking touches on actors being more likely to be cut from TV appearances than from films. Ultimately, just go with the sources. If it's announced but not "confirmed", i.e. filming hasn't begun, then it can be in prose but not filmography as IJBall says. After that, whatever the sources say should be reflected, up to release. Then you need to check the appearance in the credits. WP:V is the main policy here. Kingsif (talk) 09:45, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Infobox television: list_episodes[edit]

{{Infobox television}} list_episodes current says:

If a Wikipedia "List of" article exists for the show's episodes, put its name here.

Anyone object to adding:

If the list of episodes is in the same article, put a section link here, e.g. #Episodes.

Please also contribute to the discussion on the policy that currently says avoid links to sections of an article from its Infobox.

Jim Craigie (talk) 13:11, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

ScreenPlay episode list[edit]

Would appreciate some comments on ScreenPlay on whether to use a "custom" episode table (as is currently used), or use one using the standard television templates, which can be seen on this version. Please also note that the current table was changed 2 days ago meaning that it itself isn't the status-quo either. There are some disagreements on the usage, which is why I'd appreciate other opinions. --Gonnym (talk) 14:20, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Reverted as per WP:STATUSQUO and WP:BRD. Use of "non-standard" episodes tables is definitely something that should be discussed before changing from the standard format. --IJBall (contribstalk) 15:50, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
@IJBall:As this article has never used {{Episode table}} or {{Episode list}} until 2 hours ago, per WP:STATUSQUO and WP:BRD you should revert your own edit until consensus is reached. Your edit has broken many links.

Old revision of ScreenPlay contains a table of plays, not a list of episodes: there in not a one-to-one correspondence. A single sortable table is useful in drama anthologies to allow readers to group plays by playwright or director or title over the whole table.

The list is probably currently incomplete.

The BBC did not assign any public numbering to the plays or episodes.

Unfortunately {{Episode list}} is unsuitable for this list because:

  1. {{Episode table}} cannot generate a single sortable table
  2. there are more plays than episodes
  3. there is no consistent numbering of either, and {{Episode list}} requires numbering
  4. as the BBC didn’t assign numbers, any numbering is a Wikipedia artifact that shouldn’t be visible to readers
  5. the table is very likely to be incomplete at present
  6. {{Episode list}} does not generate anchors using titles, but uses numbers where all subsequent numbers would change every time a currently missing play is inserted; therefore the anchors it generates for each Play are likely to be unstable.
  7. Only the use of titles gives anchors that remain constant as episodes are added
  8. "What links here" only shows anchor links from Redirect pages, not from articles, so it is next to impossible to maintain links to anchors that are likely to change

Jim Craigie (talk) 16:25, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

The infobox used is {{Infobox television}} and the parameter |list_episodes= is used, so saying these are not episodes yet using the parameter which calls these episodes is contradicting. Secondly, a television series is made up of episodes. The fact that the BBC did not assign episode numbers is irrelevant. The numbers represent the broadcast order, which is the default order we list these things. In cases where we list them based on a different order, that is noted in the article. Seeing how the order is the broadcast order (based on the date value), then the numbering is correct. "What links here" only shows anchor links from Redirect pages, not from articles, so it is next to impossible to maintain links to anchors that are likely to change which is why MOS:REDIR says to use redirects rather than direct links with "#" targets. I also love how the terminology is so important to you, saying contains a table of plays, not a list of episodes, yet all the redirects you created, such as Available Light (1990 film), are disambiguated with "film". So are these plays or films? Anyways, it's also besides the point, as if these plays, or films, were created for a single series and broadcast as part of entries in a season, then calling them episodes is perfectly fine. --Gonnym (talk) 18:01, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
I firmly agree with Gonnym's changes and have implemented my own updates and fixes. Episode tables have, thus far, never needed to be sortable. Besides, the sorting function on the raw wikicode table was faulty; in this version, click any of the sorting headers twice and you'll see that the "Series" headers gather at the top in a display of poor functionality. In my edits, I reintroduced the titles as anchors, so they work perfectly fine without issue now and there needs be no argument against it. I see no further argument against the updates other than "they're plays, not episodes", which is a terminology-based argument and nothing to do with the usage of templates. -- /Alex/21 04:40, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
I agree with the change to {{Episode table}}. It's what should be used for this. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:13, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:F Is for Family § Rename[edit]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:F Is for Family § Rename. The discussion concerns the use of "Is" vs. "is" in the article's title, quoting MOS:CT. -- /Alex/21 22:33, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Mars University[edit]

Editors may want to keep an eye on Mars University. Earlier today an editor unilaterally changed the content of the article (about an episode of Futurama) to instead discuss an academic institution. Another editor subsequently nominated the article for speedy deletion as they felt the new content was promotional; I'm assuming they didn't realize that content was new and had nothing to do with the article's stable content. I've deleted the speedy notice and advised the first editor that that kind of wholesale change to an article's content is inappropriate. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 03:19, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Re-Qualify the article of 31 minutos[edit]

Hi. I am an active user on the Spanish Wikipedia, but a few weeks ago I started a full translation of an article to upgrade it. It is the one about the Chilean TV series 31 minutos, and reviewing the rating given to it (the year 2009, when it barely gave simple descriptions), I don't think it is fair considering the time elapsed and the current state of the article. As I have already mentioned, I am not very active in the English Wikipedia (and in fact, I do not handle the language well either), but I wanted to ask anyway if it is possible to re-evaluate the article. Even in the Spanish version it is a good article, so I have no doubt that this one can be too, if given a grammar and spelling check. I'm looking forward to the answer, thanks. --TheUser41 (talk) 15:35, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

@TheUser41: Do you mean the article's current Stub rating?... If so, I agree with you – the current version is at least 'C' class, so I'll update that. (I'll let others who are better at this figure out if it's at 'B' class...) If you want WP:GA status though, then you will need to go through the WP:GA process. --IJBall (contribstalk) 16:17, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

@IJBall: Yes, I was referring to that evaluation. I agree to keep it in 'C' class for the time being, thank you very much for updating it. --TheUser41 (talk) 19:09, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Deathstroke: Knights & Dragons[edit]

Thoughts on the Deathstroke: Knights & Dragons and Deathstroke: Knights & Dragons: The Movie articles? Deathstroke: Knights & Dragons started out as a web series, but it only released one episode before the entire content was released as a movie, and the series isn't going ahead anymore. Should the former article be merged into the latter? -- /Alex/21 01:26, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

I'd advocating merging both articles under Deathstroke: Knights & Dragons (with Deathstroke: Knights & Dragons: The Movie redirecting to the former) – there really is no reason for a failed TV series and the movie that resulted from it being two separate articles. It's basically the same topic. --IJBall (contribstalk) 02:56, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
I'd support that. It's same as how how Vixen and Freedom Fighters: The Ray were both CW Seed web series that receive a "The Movie" release, and both releases are detailed under each web series article. -- /Alex/21 03:06, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
I support merging the two articles with Deathstroke: Knights & Dragons: The Movie redirecting to Deathstroke: Knights & Dragons. It seems unnecessary to have two separate articles when the cast and almost everything are the same. — YoungForever(talk) 19:14, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Flesh and Blood (TV drama)[edit]

I've started a stub for a missing article at Flesh and Blood. I'm basically retired from Wikipedia and I don't intend to continue working on it. It would be great if someone could expand it. There is talk of a second season being produced. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:01, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Note that this incorrect disambiguated under WP:NCTV – it should either be at Flesh and Blood (TV series) or possibly Flesh and Blood (serial) (though I'm one of the editors that would like to see the latter deprecated). Note that Flesh 'n' Blood also exists, so if WP:SMALLDETAILS isn't enough, then these need to be at Flesh and Blood (Australian TV series) and Flesh 'n' Blood (American TV series), respectively. So I am going to hold off moving this to see if anyone here has a preference for how to move this first. --IJBall (contribstalk) 15:11, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
OK, no comment on this. I am going to give it 24 more hours, and if no one comments, I'm just going to move this to Flesh and Blood (TV series). --IJBall (contribstalk) 07:29, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
I think (TV series) is fine, maybe with a hatnote if there are problems in the future? - adamstom97 (talk) 09:54, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
Move to Flesh and Blood (TV series), and add {{Distinguish}} to the top for Flesh 'n' Blood (TV series), and a hatnote on that page too. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:36, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 Done. --IJBall (contribstalk) 16:16, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

The Mandalorian episode articles[edit]

There is currently a discussion regarding the notability of the individual episode articles for The Mandalorian that are being created. Wanted to make the larger TV project aware of this. The discussion can be found here: Talk:The Mandalorian#Episodes articles. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:28, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

FAR listing of Nikki and Paulo[edit]

I have nominated Nikki and Paulo for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Femke Nijsse (talk) 11:37, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Zeeshan_Khan_(actor) / Article :Aparna Mishra[edit]

I have submitted this new draft today and also the other article with the maximum number of references I can afford to and also while following all Wikipedia guidelines for a Wikipedia article. I request the senior Wikipedian Gods please do look into this article and give in your valuable permission for these articles. --Aleyamma38 (talk) 07:20, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Bear Witness, Take Action § Request Edit November 19th[edit]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Bear Witness, Take Action § Request Edit November 19th. Oceans87 (talk) 19:45, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Vikings: Valhalla[edit]

Vikings: Valhalla was created last month and is in need of further eyes to clean it up; I've tried my best to make it encyclopedic, but some of the language was not worthy of a WP:TV article. -- /Alex/21 00:44, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Composed by what looks like a WP:SPA – never a good sign... My suggestion is that the entire 'Overview' section should be trimmed down to just a one or two sentence 'Premise' section – it's too early from something that in-depth when the series hasn't even premiered yet. --IJBall (contribstalk) 00:51, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
I agree about the overview, hence the tag. The SPA's not a good sign, but the article's notable, given that filming has commenced and thus means NFF/NTV. -- /Alex/21 01:24, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
As an apparent spin-off of Vikings, I think it should be merged into that article for the time being. It's a well-funded Netflix series so it will be completed and aired, and the production seems notable enough with a Deadline article about negative COVID tests affecting filming – but besides that and another Deadline article confirming it was announced, and a What's on Netflix article full of casting and what amounts to not much more than speculation on the plot, there aren't any quality sources for the show as a whole yet. Since there exists a suitable parent page to create a "spin-off" section until more good sources appear, that seems the logical answer. Kingsif (talk) 01:47, 26 November 2020 (UTC)