Talk:100 episodes

Moved from main article:

External Link

This link needs an explanation. It goes back to an episode of "Happy Days" in which Fonzie was water skiing and jumped over a shark. The series had been amongst the most popular in the US at that time. This single episode was seen as containing material that went beyond what was interesting or helpful to the series, and from this point onwards a decline was seen at least critically.

Since that time jumping the shark has come to mean the over extension of what a TV show can believably do, or, more generally, the moment at which a show begins to go steadily downhill.

• jumptheshark.com chronicles when television shows go stale

dpol 02:26, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Some questions

Where does this 'rule' apply? Is it mostly an American thing? Also what does it mean by "100 episode curse"? What happened to the shows mentioned? --Mrwojo 17:08, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I'm editing this article to specify that this is indeed an American thing, and to what the "100 episode curse" refers. Daydream believer2 09:02, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

I have read where the threshold was 65 for weekday syndication television (thirteen weeks at five episodes per week) and NOT 100. In fact the 65 episode count is often presented as Robotech was made (the combined three series have only 85 episodes) and for animated series the number can be as low as 52 episodes

A couple of quotes from Broadcast syndication addressing these points:

It is common in countries where television is scheduled by networks with local affiliates, particularly in the United States. In the rest of the world, however, most countries have centralized networks without local affiliates and syndication is less common, although shows can also be syndicated internationally.

and

However, there are exceptions, such as the option is the 65-episode block (common in Children's programming), which allows for a 13-week cycle of daily showings, so there will only be four repeats in a year.

As has been mentioned below, this page could probably use some editing alongside the aforementioned Broadcast syndication page. --CrazyDreamer (talk) 06:40, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Unnecessary?

I separated the article into two sections.

However, I kinda feel that the second section is just a rehash of information that can be found at, say syndication, and jumping the shark, and maybe should be removed? Daydream believer2 09:10, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup template added

A lot of this article reads like lists of examples with no explanation as to why any given example is important. (Seriously; look at how many of the recent edits are to the "Successes and Exceptions" section!) The fact that there are exceptions to the 100-episode rule does not mean that every single one needs to be listed! Also, a lot of the examples are the result of one or more contributors confusing a show being picked up by a new network (e.g., Cartoon Network) with syndication, which is not the same thing; I've removed some of them, but I've probably missed some as well.

Some other edits I've just made: I've killed the summary of a South Park episode because it was barely relevant to its own section and really just a glorified "In Popular Culture" entry. I've killed the American Idol one-sentence paragraph because it referred to a type of rerun on the same network rather than syndication. I've killed one of the two intro paragraphs because it looked like someone wrote a new intro without killing the old one.

I've done some work re-writing this, including lots of little stuff not mentioned above, but it's still a mess. See also the discussion of whether this needs to have content moved to / moved from / aligned with Broadcast syndication.

--CrazyDreamer (talk) 07:41, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/search/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002237776
  • In 100 episodes on 2011-05-23 01:58:52, 404 Not Found
  • In 100 episodes on 2011-05-31 21:22:46, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 21:23, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 2

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/search/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000705954
  • In 100 episodes on 2011-05-23 01:58:52, 404 Not Found
  • In 100 episodes on 2011-05-31 21:22:57, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 21:23, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Stargate and Smallville?

Should Stargate SG-1 and Smallville be included on this list?

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 100 episodes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.abcmedianet.com/web/dnr/dispDNR.aspx?id=052709_07
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120722071144/http://www.foxflash.com/div.php/main/page?aID=1z2z2z2z5z2 to http://foxflash.com/div.php/main/page?aID=1z2z2z2z5z2

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:43, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 100 episodes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100326160706/http://weblogs.variety.com/on_the_air/2010/03/fox-finally-finds-a-way-to-kill-til-death-.html to http://weblogs.variety.com/on_the_air/2010/03/fox-finally-finds-a-way-to-kill-til-death-.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130430125734/http://buzzerblog.com/2013/03/gsn-refreshes-classics-lineup-with-new-press-your-luck-password-match-game-and-sale-of-the-century/ to http://buzzerblog.com/2013/03/gsn-refreshes-classics-lineup-with-new-press-your-luck-password-match-game-and-sale-of-the-century/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:29, 11 January 2018 (UTC)