Wikipedia talk:Entertainment Collaboration of the week

Quibble

Hi everyone. Just wanted to drop by to applaud you on the new TSCOTW. One quibble, though--do you think you could change the color of {{CurrentTSCOTW}} and {{Current-TSCOTW}}? I'm the founder of Wikipedia:Gaming Collaboration of the week, and I chose the light red color backgrounds so they would stand out from WP:COTW and WP:MCOTW...I was kind of thinking that each collaboration could have their own color. If you want help looking for different colors to use, you can view Wikipedia:Template messages. Thanks and I hope TSCOTW will progress to become as big as WP:COTW itself! :) Cheers, pie4all88 20:30, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I think the colours should remain the same throughout all COTWs - this should be the same as the WP:COTW and WP:MCOTW, just as WP:GCOTW should. violet/riga (t) 20:43, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

WP:MCOTW uses a blue background for their notice that a page is a current COTW. pie4all88 22:02, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Note that Wikipedia:Infobox has a lot of colors--one of which, chocolate, corresponds with TV theme songs. --pie4all88 20:12, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Television show or program

Considering that the article is television program and not television show (a redirect to it) shouldn't it follow that this is the "Television Program Collaboration of the week"? At least the template should be changed to remove the redirect. violet/riga (t) 20:49, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Further, perhaps it could be widened to Media Collaboration of the week, including radio, tv, film, magazinges, etc.. violet/riga (t) 09:24, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Ooooh, you're hot (and hopefully female) - In other words I agree with your fan-fecking-tastic idea--ZayZayEM 09:31, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I totally agree with this idea. When this was set up, I thought it was a bit too specific, unlike, say, WP:LCOTW. I would be very interested in the film/radio/mag side if it was set up. JOHN COLLISON | (Ludraman) 09:43, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Widening the scope sounds like a good idea. Tommy T 07:09, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Right, so if we're going to do this what would the shortcut be? MCOTW isn't available (used by the Magic COTW) so MediaCOTW? violet/riga (t) 19:20, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

MMCOTW? - MultiMedia: Radio, Film, TV, magazine/journals and Websites (and well known art?); We should probably leave books to LCOTW though - its a pretty big field all in itself--ZayZayEM 03:10, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Disagree with renaming. Seems like print media should go to WP:LCOTW. I think we already have a large enough scope in television. -- Netoholic @ 17:34, 2004 Oct 19 (UTC)

Would've been nice if you'd have said this before I started changing it over, along with the above support including the originator of this COTW. Printed media (ie. Newspapers) are not literature and should not appear in LCOTW. As you can see with the lack of nominations I don't think this is wide enough in scope. At least it's not popular enough. Perhaps you could've let me finish changing things and then commented about switching it back. violet/riga (t) 17:44, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

"Media" is too wide and unfocused. We have a lot of users who are television fans, and I think there is enough material there. Expand from Television Show COTW to Entertainment COTW and I think we will have a better defined focus, with enough breadth to keep us busy. I'd like to follow the hierarchy of the WikiProjects as close as possible, and Entertainment covers TV and movies, while Literature covers print media. -- Netoholic @ 18:50, 2004 Oct 19 (UTC)

Entertainment COTW sounds good to me, but the current LCOTW doesn't seem to cover all printed media at the moment. violet/riga (t) 18:56, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Now it's a bit of a mix of the two! violet/riga (t) 18:49, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Is there something wrong with this COTW? Nothing has been chosen yet.

Observations

The TSCOTW main page says that the next TSCOTW will be determined on October 10, and as of this writing, it is October 17. If this has anything to do with the fact that what this COTW will comprise of is still being considered, that's understandable, but it seems like a good idea for this page to operate in some manner in the interim. Looking at what it seems the votes were on October 10th at 1800, it seems like the TSCOTW was Party of Five with four votes, unless it really needs to have five votes to be considered. In addition, a lot of the listed shows are ripe for removal. Cordell Walker 03:37, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Pruning

I think the pruning limit should be less than 5 votes/week, maybe 3 would be best. There aren't as many voters here as in the main COTW. --Farside 20:05, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Since we just expanded the scope to Entertainment, I think 5 is a good number for now. -- Netoholic @ 21:16, 2004 Oct 19 (UTC)

I strongly doubt it, but I guess time will tell. --Farside 20:32, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Why is noone participating?

We had a lot of votes for MacGyver, but so far I am the only one working on it since it was accepted. Please jump in! :) -- Netoholic @ 20:40, 2004 Oct 22 (UTC)

Film CotW

• I suggest that this goes back to being the TV-CotW, and we have a FCotW. I would have made a project page for it already, but you guys were here first and I thought it would be a good idea to see what your thoughts are. -Litefantastic 12:04, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)