Talk:2023 SAG-AFTRA strike

Premature article

The strike hasn't even begun yet, the article could wait. Linkin Prankster (talk) 20:09, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

There are multiple [1][2][3][4] independent reliable sources confirming a strike (or at least the possibility), meeting WP:GNG. VarietyEditor (talk) 23:34, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

I agree with @Linkin Prankster, the strike has not begun and it does seem a bit premature. The WP:GNG as cited by @VarietyEditor includes the provision for "presumed" and I believe there should be language in the article title suggesting that it is iminent or presumed which could change when the actual strike is widely reported through various media sources. Jurisdicta (talk) 02:56, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

All of your sources say the strike will start on July 14/Friday/midnight User:VarietyEditor. Please read them carefully.

• The leaders of SAG-AFTRA, the union representing 160,000 television and movie actors, announced the strike after negotiations with studios over a new contract collapsed, with streaming services and artificial intelligence at the center of the standoff. On Friday, the actors will join screenwriters, who walked off the job in May, on picket lines in New York, Los Angeles and the dozens of other American cities where scripted shows and movies are made. [5]
• The SAG-AFTRA strike will begin at midnight. Union leaders said members and staff will be joining picket lines Friday. [6]
• Unable to reach a deal with producers, members of The Screen Actors Guild - American Federation of Television and Radio Artists will join up with more than 11,000 already striking film and television writers starting at midnight. [7]
• SAG-AFTRA, the union that represents about 160,000 actors, is set to strike at midnight PT Friday morning after talks with major studios and streaming services have failed. [8]

This article is premature, notability isn't the only criteria. See WP:CRYSTAL. Had it not been redundant to do so now, I would have asked for its deletion. Linkin Prankster (talk) 02:57, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I believe it is safe to say that this point is now mute as the strike is in full force. I still hold that in similar situations where there is a pending action, the article should identify in the lead that it is pending (perhaps a statement such as "as of X date, the strike appears to be pending and sources say...") to let the reader know that it has not been formalized yet. Future edits could update the lead as more information becomes available. Jurisdicta (talk) 08:28, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

The Congress as "See Also"

"They proposed that our background actors should be able to be scanned, get paid for one day's pay, and their company should own that scan, their image, their likeness and to be able to use it for the rest of eternity in any project they want with no consent and no compensation." - SAG-AFTRA National Executive Director Duncan Crabtree-Ireland

See also: The Congress (2013 film) 85.147.66.47 (talk) 00:36, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

References

Confusing sentence

In background:

"SAG-AFTRA is represented by the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP), who also represent Writers Guild of America East and Writers Guild of America West, comprising the Writers Guild of America (WGA) as a whole."

SAG-AFTRA/WAG are on one side of the dispute, and AMPTP is on the other. It makes no sense to say SAG-AFTRA is represented by AMPTP. But I'm also not sure what the sentence is trying to convey, so I'm not sure how to reword it. --Chris 12:59, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@Chris G I believe I've fixed it. RobotGoggles (talk) 17:38, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Looks good. Thank you! --Chris 03:13, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Definite Article: T̶h̶e̶ SAG-AFTRA

A note on the usage of the definite article. Unlike the Writers Guild of America (WGA) and the Association of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP), SAG-AFTRA does not use the definite article "the" when written as an acronym. "SAG" or "SAG-AFTRA" are correct. "The SAG" or "The SAG-AFTRA" are both incorrect. Only use a definite article when writing the union's full name, as in "The Screen Actors Guild". Refer to SAG-AFTRA for usage. The strike itself needs a definite article ("The strike" or "The SAG-AFTRA strike" are fine) but SAG-AFTRA itself does not. RobotGoggles (talk) 17:43, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Productions not affected subsection

Hello. I added some productions in the not affected section that wrapped filming, like Captain America: Brave New World and The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power. I noticed that they were taken off and I was wondering if you consider projects that wrapped filming to be unaffected, when projects that finished their screenplay were considered unaffected by the WGA strike? Thanks. Randazzojj123 (talk) 18:17, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

If you think about it, every film in history that was completed before the strike could go into the category "not affected". Gone with the Wind was not affected by the strike, but it makes no sense to include it. You have to draw the line somewhere, so it makes sense to include only those that were not completed prior to the strike but are not affected by the strike. Sundayclose (talk) 19:15, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I was only including things that wrapped between the start of the WGA strike and the start of the SAG strike, like the two productions I had named. Randazzojj123 (talk) 19:36, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

What does that tell us? I don't see the point. The issue is whether production has begun but suspended because of the SAG-AFTRA strike, not whether the script was completed. Sundayclose (talk) 20:20, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I would be fine with no production information section at all. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 19:26, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Forceful move

@IgelRM: I'm not sure why you decided to move this page without opening a move request and off of consensus that does not exist. This article is titled appropriately; there are plenty of actors in New York City who are also striking, and not all Hollywood actors are on strike. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 21:35, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@IgelRM and ElijahPepe: I agree it should not have been moved without discussion. And the new title is inferior. Members of the union are striking. "Hollywood actors" doesn't describe it adequately. I say move it back immediately and leave it alone unless there's a consensus here to make the move. Sundayclose (talk) 21:50, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

This was definitely a bad move and should be reversed. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 21:53, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@Randazzojj123: Moving it back to a title that is not the original is not the solution here. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 21:57, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Apologies, I thought it was that easy, and for some strange reason I thought the s in strike was capital. Randazzojj123 (talk) 22:03, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, it was quite bold. Just moving it back means it's named after a union again. Hollywood seemed like a common enough association, but maybe just 2023 actors strike. IgelRM (talk) 21:57, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I mean the signs the actors are holding say "SAG-AFTRA on strike," not "Hollywood actors on strike" or "Actors on strike." It was named 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike for a reason. Randazzojj123 (talk) 22:04, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

@IgelRM: Of course it's named after the union because it's the union that is striking. What's your point??? Sundayclose (talk) 22:09, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

The article had been moved to "2023 Hollywood actors strike". Randazzojj was pointing out that this was an inaccurate title, as the strike is for the SAG-AFTRA union, which encompasses more than Hollywood. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 10:44, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict)"Hollywood actors strike"... as if the members of a national actors' union for scripted television and film can only live and work in the stereotypical/mythical "Hollywood". Present title of "2023 SAG-AFTRA Strike" is much better. Shearonink (talk) 22:11, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Any move here should be done by an admin only (and after consensus for a move arises) that way the main page can be updated. :3 F4U (they/it) 23:02, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Who is on strike? Or what work is being struck?

The article need some clarity, I understand it might be scripted films and TV (scripted radio if there is still any) but for example, I was listening to radio journalism, they disclosed they are members of SAG AFTRA while reporting on the strike, but said something like they are not covered by the contract that is causing the strike and thus not on strike, and there is likely others, so I hope someone in the know can explain it in this article (with cites). Alanscottwalker (talk) 22:03, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

No cites atm but it's a strike of SAG-AFTRA - the film & television & radio actors' union - against the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers. The AMPTP represents the major film & television producers including Netflix, Disney, Paramount, Warner Brothers/Discovery, NBC/Comcast/Universal etc. Shearonink (talk) 04:24, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Voice acting for television and animation is not covered, while voice acting for feature films is covered by the union & so they're not allowed to work on those. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 10:42, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

It would help perhaps if the SAG-AFTRA article itself was clearer on its different contracts. At any rate, is SAG-AFTRA Strike Will Not Include News And Broadcast Members – Deadline RS? I still think this article should be clear about who is not covered. The Deadline I link also mentions confusion. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 12:04, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I added several new cites to the Not Covered section, including a Forbes article. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 12:49, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Alanscottwalker (talk) 12:59, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I looked at your source and I can't see where it says SAG AFTRA does not rep animation voice actors, is it possible they represent them but they work under a different contracts, or what is their union? -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 16:18, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Cuts: For The Many - Not The Few?

Might it not be worth highlighting in the article to that Bob Iger, who called the actors’ demands “not realistic” on TV on the morning the strike was called, "recently signed a contract to run the company through 2026 and makes about $27 million a year"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.151.2.104 (talk) 18:43, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

You already added that to the article. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 18:45, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Read WP:SYNTH. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 06:35, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Okay, okay - but what about adding something about the need for pay cuts for the few - not the many? For are not people more likely to bite the hand that refuses to feed them well?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.151.2.104 (talk) 19:17, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Do you have a source on that? Because without a source specifically discussing that, we can't add it. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 19:28, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Section on Issues

I feel it is worth including a section outlining the key issues being negotiated, with information about what is being asked for vs. what is being offered for each. Currently the issues are only mentioned in the sidebar ('Caused by'), but without any further information or links. (By the way, this is my first ever Wikipedia edit, so please be kind!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steviej2802 (talk • contribs) 13:07, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

I think that's a good idea and worthwhile addition. Would you be up for adding it? Silvestertaylor (talk) 16:35, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

The article really does need a better discussion of what the issues are. What is there is really vague, and what I, who do not follow the movie industry closely, get from the news is is also far from clear. I think a lot of people would appreciate more information about this.Bill (talk) 22:34, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

@Steviej2802 Feel free to add it in with reliable sources for citations. WP:BEBOLD. Spinixster (chat!) 03:23, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Agree with Steviej2802,Bill -I find the article is lost in describing who supports the strike and I struggle to see what the issues are!--Wuerzele (talk) 16:53, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 20 July 2023

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: Procedural close. Move request has now been bundled with the request at Talk:SAG-AFTRA#Requested move 20 July 2023. Pings for participants will follow soon. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 22:01, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

---

2023 SAG-AFTRA strike → 2023 SAG–AFTRA strike – MOS:DASH Wow (talk) 07:56, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

OpposeI am failing to see the difference between what exists in the current article and what is being requested. They seem exactly the same. What am I missing that someone else could clarify? Jurisdicta (talk) 08:31, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

The en dash. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 08:49, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support per nom.

Dawkin Verbier (talk) 09:08, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

• Comment: There's also an ongoing RM discussion at Talk:SAG-AFTRA#Requested move 20 July 2023, which proposes an exactly analogous move for the same reason. However that discussion concludes, we should move (or not move) this page to be WP:CONSISTENT with its result. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 16:50, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
• Support per MOS:DASH. This is an article formatting issue, not a common name issue. Rreagan007 (talk) 19:40, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose until someone can answer my questions on the main RM discussion linked earlier. I won't bring those concerns up here in order to keep discussion focused in one location. -2pou (talk) 20:25, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
• Procedural close and follow the results of Talk:SAG-AFTRA#Requested move 20 July 2023 :3 F4U (they/it) 20:37, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
• Seconding procedural close, as this is redundant do the other RM. O.N.R. ^(talk) 21:28, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose. The union's article is titled SAG-AFTRA, with a hyphen. In fact, the group's website also uses the hyphen. Your punctuation is erroneous. —theMainLogan (t•c) 21:57, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

  • Oppose - same reason as TheMainLogan. SAG-AFTRA's official name uses a hyphen.

  Fjardeson (talk) 22:07, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose per my reasoning at SAG-AFTRA. CAMERAwMUSTACHE (talk) 01:04, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose It should only be done if it matches the other page, and the reality is it will make the page harder to locate. PickleG13 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 04:59, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
• Support for the same reasons as what is presently Talk:SAG-AFTRA. In short, this is exactly the same case as AFL–CIO; the merged organization's name is "Screen Actors Guild – American Federation of Television and Radio Artists" not "Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists", and WP is not written in news style as a matter of policy at WP:NOT#NEWS. WP's MoS is based on academic style guides; no amount of news sources, all based on style guides that pretend en dashes don't exist, can dictate style on Wikipedia. The opposes above are all the WP:Common-style fallacy.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:32, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
• Support—by WP's rules, it's an en dash. Tony (talk) 06:48, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
• Support per WP:MOS ReneeWrites (talk) 07:27, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
• Procedural close, per WP:RMPM nom instructions. Discussion should have only occurred at Talk:SAG-AFTRA; if request is successful all related articles would be able to be moved per WP:CONSISTENT. Happily888 (talk) 12:02, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
• Procedural close – no need to have two discussions in parallel on the same question. Dicklyon (talk) 16:09, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
• Support – En-dash is used to show comparison and relation between two things, while hyphens are not. AsteriodX (talk) 18:52, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

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.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:SAG-AFTRA which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 22:18, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Bill Maher

2023 SAG-AFTRA strike captain, Sue Berch, in New York City, said watching video of Bill Maher's podcast, Club Random, with guest Jim Gaffigan left her "annoyed".

<ref name="deadline/1235537238">{{cite web |last1=Piccoli |first1=Sean |title=Dispatches From The Picket Lines: Striking Actors Dump On Bill Maher & Decry AI During NYC Rallies |url=https://deadline.com/2023/09/hollywood-strikes-picket-lines-new-york-2-1235537238/ |website=Deadline |date=5 September 2023}}</ref><ref name="youtube=WUSWY6t4sqw">{{cite web |author1=Club Random with Bill Maher |title=Jim Gaffigan |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUSWY6t4sqw |website=youtube |access-date=6 September 2023 |language=en |date=September 3, 2023}}<!-- https://www.youtube.com/@ClubRandomPodcast --></ref>

.... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 06:51, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

I don't see how that's relevant to the article. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 11:26, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Mediation

How has Gavin Newsom tried to negotiate an end to the strike? Was it in good faith? What was his proposal and why was it shot down? Is this even notable enough for a Wikipedia article? 2603:7000:D03A:5895:51E6:DC36:74F8:D2BD (talk) 22:43, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

If you read the reference, you'll see that Gavin Newsom only offered to help negotiate an end to the strike. It says so in the prose too. He never said how he would negotiate it. It is notable enough because the strike is happening in California. Spinixster (chat!) 07:45, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Strike is NOT Over

There are no credible sources to suggest that the strike has ended. We need to make sure these malicious unsourced edits do not continue to occur. Users like Ryudama and Chunlidama continue to try to use Wikipedia to spread misinformation about this labor dispute. Can we please stop them from making these bad faith edits? MooseinaBar (talk) 18:23, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Exactly. I can't believe we even have to say that! For an extra precaution, I shall report these users to the admins. - Jasonbres (talk) 18:26, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Support. The Wikipedia can only add information verified by Wikipedia:Reliable sources.-Classicfilms (talk) 22:24, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Date Error

The optimistic progress was reported on the 29th, not the 28th. GuyUser81 (talk) 00:45, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect time references

This article refers to PDT after Daylight Saving had ended in the US in 2023. It should say PST or simply PT. 75.193.74.1 (talk) 13:14, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

I demand you to remove the SEMI-PROTECTION Padlock now!

I can't believe someone put a SEMI-PROTECTION on this article until 11/12/2023. Really? What gives them the right to do this? I demand you to remove the SEMI-PROTECTION padlock right now and let them edit. MAKE WIKIPEDIA GREAT AGAIN, This is supposed to be 'The Free Encyclopedia'.

I want that padlock gone from the article right now. If you refuse, I'll be upset. The So-Called Protection Policies are a joke...Once again, it's time to MAKE WIKIPEDIA GREAT AGAIN!

End of my complaint. Spencer H. Karter (talk) 14:13, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

It needs the new contract drafted

What was agreed upon by the actors, what are the new conditions? It needs at least a summary table of the new agreement. --2803:C600:5115:EC8D:4540:3B87:474D:E819 (talk) 11:56, 22 November 2023 (UTC)