Talk:Thirtysomething/Archive 1

Archive 1

I watched thirtysomething when I was 17 and living at home with my parents. I would have loved to have been "Hope" in the story. Her relationship with "Michael" moved me in many ways. I look back on those episodes in my past with fondness. It was a brilliant programme and one I will always remember.

Capitalisation?

The Manual of Style specifically advises against lower-casing words like this - in fact, this specific show is one of the examples they use to illustrate the point:

avoid: thirtysomething is a television show that may have been sponsored by adidas..."

instead, use: Thirtysomething is a television show that may have been sponsored by Adidas..."

Personally I don't really agree, and would prefer the way it's done in this article as it stands, but I'm just pointing out that it goes against the guideline. Loganberry (Talk) 22:01, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

The Manual of Style, as it does so often, creates new problems by not following standard English style rules in its own examples. A television show should be referenced in quotation marks. Without the quotation marks, a lower-case letter could cause reader confusion in some contexts, and the avoidance of such confusion is the intent of the writers of the Manual of Style (it is not a book about how things have to be - it is about style, not grammatical absolutes). With quotation marks, or italicized, however, there would be no confusion that the word is a reference to a title. 8 December 2007 Prosandcons (talk) 00:10, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

The manual of style actually does indicate using italics to identify television series titles. As Loganberry linked, the rule about capitalization is from Manual of Style (trademarks), applying to all trademarks. ENeville (talk) 17:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Frustrating...

Rather than being used as an example of how to title articles, this article itself and the rule it adheres to needs to be changed. Who are Wikipedia editors to decide to spell or write things differently to the way the original creators intended? Correct English and proper use of grammar should not come into the equation. A title should be displayed as it is supposed to be. An initial lower case letter is technically ‘incorrect’ but using one is the only correct way to title such an article.

What was the point of the whole – “the initial letter of this article is not capitalised due to a technical restriction”, when editors are trying to purposely write things incorrectly in a uninformed bid to maintain proper grammar?

Just make sure the name/title is italicised every time it appears in the article and there will be little problem with the flow of a user’s reading (due to a noun sporting a non-capitalised initial letter).

Where does this end? Do you want to rule that Mortal Kombat should be spelled with a ‘C’ because the developers were just being stupid? Yes they were, but that's a point of view, and therefore shouldn't be advocated in the guidelines.

If it is made the standard that titles be named and written the way in which they are written in the actual media, by the creators, then it will be correct, and there will be no problems with inconsistency - people will then have no arguments. At least no valid ones. Mr.bonus 15:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

• Because we all see them say IPod and EBay... wait, no they don't... -Platypus Man | Talk 13:21, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

• From The 100 Greatest TV Shows Of All Time, published by Entertainment Weekly: "About the title: thirtysomething was written as one word to imply togetherness; it was written in lowercase letters to invoke e.e. cummings and his hip disregard for authority." Seems pretty clear that they wanted it to be that. Also, if you Google it or look on IMDb, that's what you'll see most of the time. Butterboy 06:40, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Who are Wikipedia editors to decide to spell or write things differently to the way the original creators intended? We are users of the English laguage who have chosen to adhere to a well-formedness principle above a faithfulness principle. Who are the creators of Thirtysomething to violate the standards of written English and expect everyone else to do the same? Nohat 07:41, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Because the creators didn't "design" the title that way - it IS the title in lowercase. If it is written in The New York Times and Time Magazine as "thirtysomething," I don't see how you can say that including it that way here is somehow violating the laws of English grammatical physics--especially when English is a _living_ language. Furthermore, it is ridiculous to claim that it is a steadfast rule of English that all titles and proper nouns be written solely in initial caps. While some may wish to deny the existence of trademark law because they are lazy or ignorant, I personally always use "iPod" and "eBay," just as Wikipedia itself already accurately uses a lowercase "d" in "Les Liaisons dangereuses" in its Dangerous Liaisons reference, and also rightfully refuses to use a lowercase "c" in its Leonardo DiCaprio reference. 8 December 2007 8 December 2007 (UTC) Prosandcons (talk) 23:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Gary's Death?

The article refers to Gary dying when his bicycle is hit by a car. I can't find any documentation on this one way or another, but I recall that the accident happened while he was driving a car on the Schuylkill Expressway. As I recall the show, he normally rode a motorcycle, so the other characters at first assumed he had been on his cycle, but then it was revealed that ironically he was killed in a car. I'm pretty sure the accident was supposed to have happened on the Schuylkill, and I don't think bicycles are allowed on that road. Can anyone find documentation about this storyline?

I remember him being on a bicycle (I had actually forgotten he had a motorcycle, but you're correct in that). The irony of the episode is tat everyone expected that the other character, with cancer (Nancy?) would die. 8 December 2007 Prosandcons (talk) 00:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

The title

Dear Raul654, There is a problem with the Thirtysomething (TV series). The name was chosen as "thirtysomething" not "Thirtysomething." WP: MOSTM state that it should be always capital when it's a Proper noun even if it was accepted "officially." I object that rule and changed it, because it was causing too many problems. I saw back-and-forth discussions about it on the talk page from a year-ago. The majority agreed with it being lowercase. I changed everything in the article that said it capitalized -- from "Thirtysomething" to "thirtysomething." But, there is a problem I can't fix, the title. I tried changing it and it said that it was typed the same and it didn't work. So I tried typing "thirtysomething (TV Series)" instead of "thirtysomething (TV series)." I was thinking maybe Wikipedia would pick "t" up and then I would of just changed "(TV Series)" back to "(TV series). But, it came out like this --> "Thirtysomething (TV Series)" so I had to change it back. Do you know why it isn't working? AnnieTigerChucky (talk) 04:05, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

There is a problem someone reverted the edit on WP: MOSTM. AnnieTigerChucky (talk) 04:11, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey ATC, how are you? Raul is pretty busy, so maybe I can help you on my talk page? I think Wiki articles have to start with a cap, even when the actual word doesn't; I had the same issue with the song by Nirvana, "tourette's". I don't think there's anything you can do about it, although correcting it within the article is the right thing to do. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Dear SandyGeorgia, Check out the article, eBay it's not using correct grammer and was accepted. "Ebay" would not look right. AnnieTigerChucky (talk) 04:39, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, good point, ATC. It's late for me to work on this tonight; will see what I can do tomorrow. Probably someone else who reads my talk page will have the answer. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:44, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Found the relevant MOS page here. Annie, this Manual of Style page explains the difference between something like iPod or eBay and k.d. lang or adidas, where we do follow normal capitalization rules. It looks like the cap on Thirtysomething has to stay. Will see if someone else differs. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:59, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Thirtysomething should remain capitalized due to the MOS paragraph found by Sandy. It is reasonable for encyclopedia style to rule even when the inventors of trademarks try to create catchy anomalies. We even have the poet E. E. Cummings with capitals. I think that each occurrence of thirtysomething within the article should be changed to Thirtysomething. EdJohnston (talk) 06:19, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I understand. But if I made a book or news article on "thirtysomething." I would do it lowercase. But, I understand your point if view and will change it back. (P.S. A lot of articles on this TV series would normally write it like, "Thirtysomething", but every now and then I saw it written like, "thirtysomething", "thirty-something", and very rarely like this "thirty something.") This looks like news article journalists even made these mistakes. Thanx everyone! AnnieTigerChucky (talk) 22:02, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I am going to add this section to the Thirtysomething talk page. AnnieTigerChucky (talk) 22:09, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

active in 60's counterculture?

Wouldn't the characters have been too young to be part of the countercultre in the 1960s? I'm guessing they were around 32 - 34 when the series started, making them no older than 16 in 1969. It's true that they could have started college in the very early 1970s, when the Vietnam war was still on...so they could have participated in the tail end of it in the 1970s. Though to specifically say "60's counterculter" is, I think, incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.142.113.132 (talk) 00:07, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

16 is the teenage years which for most people are what they remember most about. The drama of high school. Seeing drama on TV. All that horseradish sticks in people's minds the most. What I remember most about this show was how wimpy and woosy the men were. How they gave in and crumbled. That was one of the biggest criticisms of the show. Remember that this was a woman's show. It showed the world what women wanted to see about men, not how men really are. Even the actors back then would admit that they did not agree with their characters actions at times.66.236.143.130 (talk) 20:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree, it is lazy to think of these characters as participants in the social changes of the 60's. Hope says she is 31 in the first season (1987) and other characters are +- 3 years from Hope. It isn't important to me that there is a mistake of dates, but our social history seems to be built upon the ideas of the decade. These are actually the people that grew into adulthood in the "Me" 70's. They did not march on Washington, they smoked a joint to take an inward journey. They supported the social movements of Black Liberation, Woman's Rights and Gay Rights but they were not on campus's with guns. These were the post-hippy, organic, pre-preppy college students...I know, I was one of them.174.67.223.97 (talk) 21:41, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Request for comment on articles for individual television episodes and characters

A request for comments has been started that could affect the inclusion or exclusion of episodes and characters, as well as other fiction articles. Please visit the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(fiction)#Final_adoption_as_a_guideline. Ikip (talk) 11:26, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

title change

I'm not sure how to do it, but can the title be changed to "thirtysomething"? The 'iPhone' article isn't spelt "Iphone". 203.26.125.101 (talk) 00:42, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

This has been discussed before; see the archive. If you want to improve the article, how about adding some references?--Oneiros (talk) 15:07, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 17 August 2015

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. A strong argument has been made that the TV show is the primary topic in terms of usage and the counter-argument that it does not meet the long-term significance criterion is unconvincing and has been rebutted. Dab page moved to Thirtysomething (disambiguation) and deleted, hatnotes will suffice. Jenks24 (talk) 14:27, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

---

Thirtysomething (TV series) → Thirtysomething – The television series is the clear PRIMARYTOPIC (23600 views vs. the song's 1300 views vs. the album's 1200 views). Moreover, there are no other articles on Wikipedia using the title Thirtysomething. The other two pages listed at the disambiguation page spell "thirty" numerically, and a hatnote at the new Thirtysomething page is preferable. – Wikipedical (talk) 03:25, 17 August 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 22:39, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:51, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

• Page Thirtysomething (TV series) says that the series ran for 4 years and finished 24 years ago. Is it still as dominatingly notable now was it was then? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:51, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
  • As I showed above, the page view count is extraordinary larger for the show. The show's article itself even points out that the term "thirtysomething" entered the lexicon because of the series, entering the OED in 1993. And the fact that there is no other article with the word spelled out. So yes- the TV series is definitely the primary topic. A hatnote should suffice for the other two pages. -- Wikipedical (talk) 05:11, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
  • It's also clear from a quick Google search of "Thirtysomething" that it's quite difficult to find anything unrelated to the TV series, the show itself or the general term stemming from the show. -- Wikipedical (talk) 05:16, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
• Comment would the disambiguation page move to 30 Something (disambiguation) ? -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 05:30, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
  • The disambiguation page should move back from Thirtysomething to Thirtysomething (disambiguation), which should include the television series, the term, and the two music articles that reference the term coined by the series. -- Wikipedical (talk) 06:30, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose - if there's a primary it'd be the term not the TV show. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:31, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Is that based on your personal view or something else? The series won the best drama Emmy and is by far the most apparent entry when Googling. But more importantly, there is no Wikipedia article for the term, which stemmed directly from the series. I seriously disagree. -- Wikipedical (talk) 06:36, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
    • A good example is Catch-22 vs. Catch-22 (logic). But of course there is already a Wiktionary entry for the term Thirtysomething, which seems more fitting. -- Wikipedical (talk) 06:47, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
• Support the move of Thirtysomething (TV series) → Thirtysomething, although I'm not sure the disambiguation page currently at Thirtysomething is needed at all, not even at Thirtysomething (disambiguation). It has four links at present, but ageing is a very tenuous page to link and WP:2DABS says "If there are two or three other topics, it is still possible to use a hatnote which lists the other topics explicitly". The hatnote
  This page is about the television show. For the album, see 30 Something (album). For the song, see 30 Something (song).
  could easily be used at the top of Thirtysomething [the TV show], and does not exceed 2DABS' recommended maximum length of "well over one line on a standard page". — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 08:35, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
  • I think hatnotes would be fine as well. -- Wikipedical (talk) 16:14, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
• Weak. Leaning no PrimaryTopic. Pageviews are unpersuasive of long term significance, especially for transitory commercial products for modern youth. The term is used in the article Aging, and although "tenuous", it is used and sourceable (eg [1], [2], [3]). --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:28, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

• Support per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC (based on the evidence in the nomination); delete the dab page and use hatnotes per User:Bilorv's comments above. The link to ageing in the dab page is not "tenuous"; it's ridiculous (per WP:NOTDICT). —  AjaxSmack  22:03, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Issue with the television box

Does anyone know what's wrong with the coding that's forcing the text to appear so messed up on the page? I can't seem to see the problem or fix it. Atrivedi (talk) 08:16, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

An IP edit directly before your two edits caused the problem, by removing part of a file name; the missing set of closed brackets caused the errors. (By the way, new sections on a talk page go at the bottom, not the top.) — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 16:52, 28 February 2016 (UTC)