Television Template‑class

This template 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. For how to use this banner template, see its documentation.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

Can Planned by be added as parameter? Or can we continue using "Created by" and "Developed by"? The South Korean infobox has it and a lot of articles (TV series articles) use it. Manly, a planner is a production manager that oversees the production company and help it plan the work. He is not part of the production company or it is an entire different company that help plan everything before the production company start shooting. So far people have been using "Created by" and "Developed by" since there is no "Planned by". May question is, which is the correct parameter for this? CherryPie94 (talk)

Please see [1]

Hello, there seems to be an issue with inserting a website URL for this page. I tried using the {{url|...}} template (in the form | website={{url|itv.com/prizeisland}}, but it displayed square brackets either side when previewed, and showed the link next to the word 'website'. Is this an error with syntax or the template?

As it goes, the link should have been removed from this particular page anyway—I just thought I would bring it here in case it was causing errors elsewhere. –Sb2001 17:27, 21 January 2018 (UTC) PS: I think this is different from the case presented previously. I have never encountered this problem anywhere else.[reply]

|website=http://www.itv.com/prizeisland seems to work fine.[2] --AussieLegend (✉) 18:19, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is it that http:// is needed? Otherwise, I am dumbfounded. Thanks for looking into it, though. –Sb2001 18:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

topic says it all. Simply noted for others that may run across it. Ahwiv (talk) 22:56, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Co-Producers and Co-Executive Producers are high ranking members of a TV Show's crew and often lead the direction of the show as well as make decisions about the show's story line. It has been disputed by many that Co-Executive Producers do not belong in the Executive Producer list and that Co-Producers do not belong in the Producer list. If Co-Executive Producers have a higher ranking that Producers, shouldn't they have a spot in the info box? Shouldn't Co-Producers get recognition for their hard work on a TV Series? Is there anyway we could possibly start adding Co-Executive Producers to the Executive Producer list or that we could make a separate Co-Executive Producer section? (Editor.ww.wentz (talk) 21:45, 26 January 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Co-Executive producers are more times than not also writers on the series/season, so they get recognition elsewhere. Additionally, as far as I've seen, Co- credited individuals never get higher ranking than non Co- credited individuals. As you said yourself, this has been discussed before and I don't see any new reason or push for their inclusion. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:07, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Some Executive Producers and Producers also serve as writers while some Co-Executive Producers don't serve as writers. It makes no sense to credit producers but leave out Co-Executive Producers who are clearly rank higher and do more for the show. WGA ranks Co-Executive Producers and Supervising Producers below Executive Producers but above Producers. Refusing to give them credit is like crediting the president and the regular cabinet but leaving out the Vice-President. Starforce13 (talk) 03:17, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have come across different articles that list the narrator using the actor's name while others the character's name. Which one of this is acceptable. I have read the guidelines and I found that specific section not really specifying the correct way of formatting.

Thank you in advance. Nyanchoka : talk 2 me 13:01, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It should be the actor. --AussieLegend (✉) 14:33, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]