Talk:Girls Versus Suits

January cameo for Amanda Peet. No details so it might not even be this episode. -- Horkana (talk) 07:56, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

to whoever put the continuity part up, if you watched the episode, he taught in economics AND architecture, the statement is still valid. Mjcrow (talk) 02:02, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

the wording has been changed to mention the specific episodes where the information was revealed and is pretty good. I just didn't think it was necessary to mention what he was teaching, the relevant information is that she was in the class. -- Horkana (talk) 16:45, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

On the continuity part, technically he taught both classes. but in the episode, the narrator makes it very clear that he is referring to the economics class. I think it should also be clear on the wiki that the girl is in the economics class and NOT his architecture class.darknessgp (talk) 11:48, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Production/Casting

Before the episode aired there were two sample pages of the script available. Since the episode aired they are not needed for the Plot summary but they are still an interesting piece of production information, and there might be a suitable way to include this information elsewhere in the article. -- Horkana (talk) 16:45, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Ted is starting to get used to being Professor Mosby but cannot get used to his young students making him feel old.

He meets a kindred spirit in Cindy a student roughly his own age whom he can relate to, as in being older and in college.

References

Wendy the Waitress

Barney claims never to have slept with a hot bartender. This claim does not exclude the possibility of him having slept with many bartenders, just not any especially hot bartenders. It is relevant continuity to point out he has previously scored another member of MacLarens staff. Since Barney describes her as "Wendy the Waitress" even though she also works the bar that is again enough of a technicality for his statement to be true. There is no need to pedantically add that "Wendy the Waitress" is a waitress. NPH thought the writers were telling a "bit of a lie" but Barney isn't known for being truthful and writer are known for artistic license. We should not speculate what the writers intentions were, and wikipedia doesn't do "continuity errors", only because NPH mentioned it does it gain enough notability to be included. -- Horkana (talk) 01:46, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what is going on with the multiple edits to this item (none of which I have made), but I do have an observation. In the episode no mention is made of Wendy. In NPH's comments, he does not ever mention Wendy as the reason he thinks the writers might be telling a bit of a lie. But by putting the information about Wendy in the item right after the NPH quotation it suggests that this is his reason, but that's just speculation. So to be less speculative it would be better to remove the second sentence altogether. NPH implies that Barney might have had a hot bartender before, but he never says that it is because he had Wendy. Barney has had tons of women over many seasons of the show, so NPH might well be thinking of something else. 142.68.51.146 (talk) 16:33, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

I'll split it out into a separate continuity point based on your suggestion, that's probably better. -- Horkana (talk) 19:16, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree. (142.68.51.146 aka 99.192.95.231 (talk) 19:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC))

The only thing that needs to be stressed, and it seems it needs to be stressed repeatedly, is that Wendy the Waitress is a waitress, not a bartender. If I need to put it even more simply, not everyone who works in a bar is a bartender. ~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.245.74 (talk) 14:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Another editor added that she is seen bartending on occasion. I was thinking about adding it myself anyway. I'll try and add an episode citation to reinforce it if I have time. -- Horkana (talk) 03:50, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect Title

^{(This section has also posted to WikiProject Television talk page on the same date.)}

Per IMDb, the official CBS HIMYM site and my own memory, the title is "Girls Vs. Suits" not "Girls Versus Suits." I know it's not a huge distinction, but it's there just the same and I know I'm really picky about this kind of thing. Wikipedia strives for accuracy and I want to be accurate. I'm trying to understand why it's been mis-titled in the first place...is there some kind of WP block that would prevent the use of an abbreviated word or a period in a title (my personal experience on WP says NO.) Other than some kind of a specifically stated guideline advising me not to, I don't see a reason not to change the title.

I don't feel like this is a big enough issue for me to need to post to Requested Moves since I can do the move myself, I just wanted to find out if someone out there maybe know something I don't about why this happened. If there's a valid WP reason why the page can not be re-titled and moved, please please let me know soon. ocrasaroon (talk) 06:30, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Girls Versus Suits. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091009085352/http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com:80/entertainment_tv/2009/10/tim-gunn-how-i-met-your-mother.html to http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/entertainment_tv/2009/10/tim-gunn-how-i-met-your-mother.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100111051316/http://www.etonline.com:80/news/2010/01/82680/index.html to http://www.etonline.com/news/2010/01/82680/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100109232822/http://www.nytimes.com/ to http://nytimes.com

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:58, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Girls Versus Suits. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100109232822/http://www.nytimes.com/ to http://nytimes.com

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:22, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

NY Times review

I suspect there may be a problem with this citation. I first noticed what looks like a copy & paste of the title from the IGN review. I wasn't able to access the (alleged) NY Times review, and when I tried googling the author listed, "Nickolas Clague" NY times, there were only 6 hits which were all related to this article. So I went back through the history and traced it to [this edit] by an unregistered user. I looked that up and this is the only edit made by that IP address. So this looks to be bogus and I would tend to remove it, but it's been part of the article for six years and I'd appreciate a second opinion. - Reidgreg (talk) 22:23, 2 September 2016 (UTC)