Talk:List of My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic episodes/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

(Untitled section)

There are episode details at http://television.aol.com/show/my-little-pony-friendship-is-magic/11869132/episodes , but they don't seem to be the same ones as listed here. My link also doesn't list the writer. Where are you getting your information? Laofmoonster (talk) 17:37, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

There are a bunch of other TV guides around, so my guess is that they're using one of them. As for the writer, it says who wrote it in the episode itself. --Pyritie (talk) 13:15, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Rumored Season 2 Episode 1 Premiere

Well Equestria Daily is just updated and I saw something interesting. Link is here: http://www.equestriadaily.com/2011/08/rumor-season-two-potentially-next-month.html

Potentially, Season 2 will air in September 17, 2011 at 9 AM Eastern on the Hub according to an Animator of the Show. Episode one is titled "The Return of Harmony" - Discord escapes from his stone prison and Twilight and her friends act quickly to find the Elements of Harmony to stop him.

It's still a RUMOR and we need to wait for IMDB for the official confirmation. So don't add it yet unless we get more proof. Blackgaia02 (talk) 01:30, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

You have one of the animators talking on Deviant Art, It's pretty confirmed. The date is a rumor however. Brightgalrs (/braɪtˈɡæl.ərˌɛs/)^[1] 06:06, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Anyone got a link to the animator on deviantArt? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.70.109.20 (talk) 15:23, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Is there a source for this note tacked to the end of the S01E15 entry

I was curious if there was a direct source link to verify the alternate message that is suggested for Season 1, Episode 15, "Feeling Pinkie Keen".

The line in question:

(Originally the message was supposed to be be open minded)

Richfiles (talk) 00:23, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

The Big Lebowski reference

In the episode "The Cutie Pox", the character Jesus from the film The Big Lebowski can be seen in the bowling hall (pony style). It doesn't really fit in into the article but it's fun trivia that should be mentioned here. --Devadatta (talk) 22:36, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

It's not just Jesus, but the other three characters are there as well. However, we would need a secondary source to make before including this. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 23:12, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

The episode 13 reordering.

Can we make a mention somewhere that the "Hearth's Warming Eve" episode is listed as #13 because of a reshuffling of the broadcast order? The reason it was "mistakenly" episode 13 is because it was the 13th in production order. Production order was Family Appreciation Day -> Baby Cakes -> Hearth's Warming Eve. For broadcast order, they just moved HWE back two slots. I really think that should be mentioned in the article/list. dogman15 (talk) 20:08, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Past Sins

I reverted a new edit which added the section "Past Sins". The references used are both 404, and I cannot find anything at all about this online anywhere. Is this some fanfiction or something? --Harizotoh9 (talk) 01:49, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

"I cannot find anything at all about this online anywhere."? Really? I did a Google search for, and I quote:

"Past Sins" my little pony

And I got this: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Fanfic/PastSins Yes, it is a fan fiction. I've never read it, and I don't intend to read it, but anyone who's sufficiently involved with the community (like regularly visiting Equestria Daily) would know about this story and what it is. dogman15 (talk) 08:09, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

"Baby Cakes" synopsis

As I've suggested in my edit summary, we should just leave it as the ponyleaks link has it. It can always be changed once the episode actually airs. HalfShadow 00:28, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Valentine's Day Episode

No synopsis or any other details released yet, but EQD confirmed a Valentine's Day episode for 11/2/2012. Mcoov (talk) 06:41, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Why were the Friendship Reports nuked?

I for one don't consider them "fan cruft"... 72.92.210.214 (talk) 01:34, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I agree, the friendship reports were taken straight from the show and were good information. They were definitely not fan made trivia/factoids akin to comments like "Twilight doesn't make an appearance on this episode". 128.120.174.212 (talk) 06:06, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Hmm... It was a single edit: [1] by User:Throwawaytv which is interesting because they claim to be the "My Little Pony Friendship is Magic Wiki founder." (!!!) So if that's true, in terms of Wikipedia:Fancruft I doubt it was being used as a pejorative (note existance of [2]), but rather I would assume they are saying that its more along the lines of trivia, which generally doesn't belong on Wikipedia. If you disagree strongly, you are certainly welcome to follow the advice on Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle however. -- Limulus (talk) 09:38, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I don't disagree strongly, I was just confused as to why they were removed (since it was all at once I assumed it was a triva purge or something). I personally believe friendship reports are as much fact as the summaries if transcribed directly as they are essentially the "lesson of the episode". But then again I'm no expert on wikis and what should and should not be on them. 128.120.174.212 (talk) 18:28, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Supposed S2 episode name

I have reverted the edit of the Season 2 premiere being called "Putting Your Hoof Down" as per info from the IMDB page. So far we have no idea of knowing if this is the genuine name or simply something someone edited the wiki-like IMDB to say, so until we get another source it should be kept out. GreenGenie (talk) 23:47, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

yes it's called putting your hoof down and it's got a link on equestria daily. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thesafepony (talk • contribs) 16:00, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Original research and editorializing

Please avoid original research and editorializing like "sets the near-unbreakable record" or "Note:". The article is pretty heavy on these, and this should be an encyclopedic article, not an opinion piece or personal blog. –Throwawaytv (talk) 12:23, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Someone posted "This episode is notable for being the first instance of Derpy Hooves being referred to by name (by Rainbow Dash)." under the episode info for The Last Roundup, which seems like one of these original research things. In addition Rainbow Dash only says "Derpy", not "Derpy Hooves". I can't edit since I'm not a member.128.120.174.212 (talk) 05:19, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

What's with the absent/no speaking roles notes?

I don't understand how the notes on main ponies absent or not having speaking roles contribute to the episode list. Trivia and Friendship reports were removed some time ago and I don't see how this is more "encyclopedic information" than the random trivia along the lines of, "this is the first episode that Twilight does not make an appearance".128.120.174.212 (talk) 22:58, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

I agree. I will remove them. ctzmsc3|talk 19:43, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Season 2 two-part final

There's been a rumor on Equestria Daily about the final of season two premeiring on April 21 I think. Might want to check into this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.75.236.174 (talk) 18:06, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

To a degree, this has been confirmed, but only in the sense that the TV Guide magazine page that was shown on Equestria Daily and other sites has been confirmed to be in the latest issue of TV Guide. Some people are dubious that the information is legitimate though, and it doesn't clarify if both episodes (25 and 26) are airing on April 21st, or just one of them. Until we can get further confirmation, we should leave it as is.

Additionally, I cleared out episodes 24-26 information for titles, airdates, and summaries as they can't yet be sourced to any guide, and thus aren't verifiable. 184.60.17.3 (talk) 02:11, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

about number of episodes for season two

could you please stop reverting my edits, there are truly 24 episodes for season two. go to equestria daily for more information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thesafepony (talk • contribs) 17:05, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not the one reverting you, but I thought I'd respond. As I understand it, the Discord episodes were produced as part of Season One, making that "production season" 28 episodes long. However, the Discord episodes got held over to be aired as part of Season Two, so while there were 24 episodes produced for Season Two, there will be 26 aired in the broadcast season, which is what is referred to in the article. (I can't find a single source that explains every single bit of this, but searching "24 episodes season 2" in EqDaily will pull up most of the news posts where the confusion started, and this news post clears up the confusion.) Disclaimer: I fully admit that I may be misunderstanding the situation, but I am hesitant to believe you until you provide a source.

Forgot to sign... three days ago. Whoops. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 04:32, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

as confirmed on equestria daily season two has a two-part finale resulting in 26 episodes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Griffygriff7 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

episode #s within seasons on this list...

Episode numbers within each season would be helpful — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicholascullen (talk • contribs) 14:13, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 27 March 2012

Please get rid of the large amount of false episodes they are green so it should be easy 216.254.236.211 (talk) 03:47, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Rearranging the episodes to production order, and why

As per WP:BOLD I've decided to rearrange the episodes to what I believe to be the more correct order, that of the production order, citing as many official sources as I can that both support me and do not support me. (I consider Hasbro, The Hub, iTunes, Netflix and any DVD releases to be official sources. I don't particularly care for citing Zap2It, even though it supports my argument, but I'm presently leaving it on the page as it was already cited and, presumably, nobody has any qualms with it.)

The reasons I've decided to do this are as follows:

1. I greatly prefer using information straight from the horse's mouth (pun not intended). If the people behind a given product consistently say A, then even if the fanbase of the product says B, I'm inclined to go with A. (I don't particularly extend this into fanon, with background pony nicknames like Lyra (fandom's) vs. Heartstrings (Hasbro's) and the like, mind; this is more or less just as it applies to the main details of the show.)
2. Considering mainly the official sources listed, they have almost consistently listed "Family Appreciation Day", "Baby Cakes" and "Hearth's Warming Eve" as episodes 11, 12 and 13 of Season 2, respectively.
   • This is difficult to prove with The Hub's website, as they have a predilection toward putting an episode up for a few days and then pulling it again. I do have evidence, however, that I am correct: the thumbnails used to represent these three episodes remain, even though the episodes themselves do not, and they clearly use production order in the file names. I would like to cite these in the article, but I'm not sure how one would go about citing filenames of all things, so I've chosen to omit them at present.
   • The sole exception to this, at present, is the iTunes Store. Amusingly, I was following this issue closely at the time the episodes aired, due to an argument with regards to the corresponding article on TVTropes. The episodes were uploaded in the order of airdate, generally the day after, but were listed in production order! In the case of "Hearth's Warming Eve", this was changed the day after, but "Family Appreciation Day" and "Baby Cakes" were also uploaded with production order listings, resulting in the odd situation where there were two episode 11s listed; these, too, were changed to the listing presented today. Unfortunately, I can not cite this amusing change of events in my favor, as the evidence has since been erased, and beside that, it would constitute original research, which I'm well aware Wikipedia does not support.
3. When the episodes are rerun on The Hub, the order used (to an extent) is production order. See the Zap2It listing of upcoming episodes as of 12:09 AM on 2012/07/16 (since this will rapidly vanish due to the nature of TV listings, I have taken a snapshot as more permanent evidence - edited in Photoshop only to crop out whitespace, my Firefox tabs, the Windows task bar, etc. from the screen capture; the image has otherwise not been tampered with). This furthers my belief that this is the correct order.

I am aware the fanbase has more or less run with airdate order. However, I am not concerned with doing what is popular or easy; I am concerned with doing what is correct, and I believe all the evidence points to the version I am submitting being the correct order.

Also, bear in mind this is the first time I've edited Wikipedia in months (despite being registered since around 2004); the only wiki I've been regularly editing lately is TVTropes (where we have already started using production order), which has notable differences in syntax and protocol. Forgive me in advance if I royally botched something up in the process of making the changes; from what I can tell, at least, it seems to be okay. --Shadow Hog (talk) 04:49, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate your boldness, but I think you're making an error of thought here. Surely the airdate order is just as correct as the production order? They are different things to order the episodes by, but neither is truly incorrect. I think we should look A) towards what seems logical, on the face it; B) towards what people are most likely to find useful, and C) towards other Wikipedia articles, to provide some consistency and learn from earlier consensus.

Neither one seems particularly illogical to me, either is valid under A). As the fandom uses the order they are aired in most often, according to B) it would be better to use the airdate order. You say you are not concerned with what is popular, but because Wikipedia is made for human consumption, what is popular can be easiest for readers to work with. As for C), I looked at a few "List of <show> episodes" articles, and they tend to use the airdate, if there is a difference between airdate and production order. See List of The Simpsons episodes for example, which orders episodes by airdate. (It also gives the production code, showing the discrepancy between airdate and production order.) My suggestion would be to order the episodes by airdate, which seems to be the standard, and to give the episodes' associated production code or at least their production order as well. Knight of Truth (talk) 02:18, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Regarding "babysitter" versus "foalsitter".

It's interesting to note that Charlotte Fullerton used babysit in "Baby Cakes", but Meghan McCarthy used foalsit in "A Canterlot Wedding". So that means that both terms are used in Equestria. I wonder what the difference is? dogman15 (talk) 18:18, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

You're reasoning from an in-universe perspective. While that's an interesting thing to discuss, it's not very relevant to Wikipedia--if anything, we should note the show is inconsistent about "babysit" versus "foalsit", rather than trying to find out what the difference is or whether one is more correct. As for using them in prose, I think "normal" terms are are preferred over specific terms used in the show, unless a difference in meaning exists, so we ought to go for "babysit". (The same for "mane six" versus "main six", "everypony" versus "everyone", etc.) Knight of Truth (talk) 02:23, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit war

Both 98.71.213.131 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and Ducknish (talk · contribs) are edit warring. Please discuss the changes you want to make HERE citing reliable sources. Both of your are edit warring, and any further edits may result in a block (although I am not an admin and will have to make one or more reports in other locations). In summary, please do not edit the article (at all) until a consensus is achieved here. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 16:48, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

This is getting nowhere fast. I have requested full page protection to prevent further edit warring and to allow consensus to be reached.  █ EMARSEE 18:25, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Source says, that there will be 13 episodes and very likely "more episodes, or a movie, after season 3." So basing on this, we can say that season 3 is going to consist only 13 episodes. Am I right? --Crusier (talk) 18:38, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Very likely isn't the same thing as confirmed though, there is always a possibility that there won't be a season four of FIM (rule of 65). We don't know yet and we can't speculate because of WP:CRYSTAL. The only thing that we do know is that season three is going to consist of 13 episodes and that should be reflected in the article.  █ EMARSEE

And I wasn't postulating putting it in the article. As I said on 98.71.213.131's talk page: just clarifying that either way it would be after season 3, so it doesn't matter in this discussion --Crusier (talk) 19:51, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I've full protected the page for 12 hours and reverted it back to its original state, pre-edit war. Hopefully this will encourage some discussion. Best, Blurpeace 18:42, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

That hasn't happened sadly, another IP is still removing the reference without using the talk page to discuss his actions.  █ EMARSEE 16:52, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

A blogger with a byline on a fansite, saying they heard McCarthy say that during a 93 minute podcast is not a reliable source for contested material, it's hearsay. I'm presuming this is actually on the audio file, but neither the fansite nor Nerdist bother to say at what time the McCarthy portion is, let alone that specific statement, nor is there a transcript. Sourcing "It's true, I heard it" to a fan blog, even if it's correct, is ridiculous, but I'll leave it. Good luck. Dru of Id (talk) 17:54, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

15 min 37 sec. --Crusier (talk) 18:26, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Then the citation is <ref>{{cite podcast |url= http://www.nerdist.com/2012/07/nerdist-writers-panel-48-animation-celebration/ |title= Nerdist Writers Panel: Animation Celebration! |website= [[The Nerdist Podcast]] |publisher= nerdist.com |host= [[Chris Hardwick]] |date= 2012-05-06 |time= 15:37 |accessdate= 2012-07-28}}</ref> . Dru of Id (talk) 18:53, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Iron Will

I wanted to add a note saying that Trevor Devall voiced Iron Will in "Putting Your Hoof Down", but I was surprised to find that this page was locked. Trevor Devall was interviewed recently, and it was revealed that he voiced Iron Will: http://www.equestriadaily.com/2012/07/trevor-devall-iron-will-and-fancy-pants.html dogman15 (talk) 18:53, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Dogman15, sorry about the inconvenience. I've made the change you've requested. Tell me if it's satisfactory or if I should change something else. Best, Blurpeace 19:05, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

To match with the other listings of guest roles on the show in this article, I'll remove the "voiced by" and leave just "(Trevor Devall)". I also don't think the citation is necessary here, because the other VA listings on this page don't have a citation, and the Equestria Daily article isn't the true source of the information. Thanks, though! dogman15 (talk) 03:55, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

New Zealand Broadcast Citation

There is no citation for the claim that this show is broadcast in New Zealand on Cartoon Network (or if Note 2 is intended as a citation for this it does not support the claim). I've rummaged around on the internet for a while and can find no evidence at all that this show is being broadcast on any network in New Zealand. I would simply add a Citation Needed tag, but the article seems to be locked, so I'll just make a note of it here. 122.57.240.121 (talk) 02:54, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done template added. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:10, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

--

I contacted Hasbro at the beginning of this year. I asked them when the show will air again in New Zealand (I had seen it on Cartoon network a few times in 2011, but then it stopped airing). Here's a screenshot of the email I got in response: http://puu.sh/ZLlv — Preceding unsigned comment added by TehJayden (talk • contribs) 07:40, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Color discrepancy on episode table

In the section "Series overview" on both this article and the main article, the colors are different. The episodes list article (here) has some sort of purple for season 1, darker purple for season 2, and dark green for season 3. On the other hand, the main article has blue for season 1, red for season 2, and bright green for season 3. Can we make these colors consistent with each other, please? Which colors should go and which should stay? dogman15 (talk) 19:11, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Season 3 release date?

Shouldn't we put December 4th, 2012? Coz from the sound of things we won't be seeing those first two episodes until the DVD comes out. 24.65.99.129 (talk) 16:43, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Season 3 Airdates updated on tvlisting.zap2it.com

There is airdate listed for several season 3 episodes that isn't showing on the wiki page.

S03, E10 Spike at Your Service 12/29/2012

S03, E09 Apple Family Reunion 12/22/2012

S03, E07 Wonderbolt Academy 12/15/2012

S03, E06 Sleepless in Ponyville 12/08/2012

S03, E05 Magic Duel 12/03/2012

S03, E04 One Bad Apple 11/24/2012

S03, E03 Too Many Pinkie Pies 11/17/2012

S03, E02 The Crystal Empire 11/10/2012

S03, E01 The Crystal Empire 11/10/2012

This was pulled from citation [11] [3] fixed ref tags

Tlarseth (talk) 09:44, 31 October 2012 (UTC)tlarseth

 Not done. Wikipedia is not the place to list future things of this type. See WP:CRYSTAL. gwickwire | Leave a message 23:25, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

The article already reflects most of that information, anyway. dogman15 (talk) 01:00, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Series 1, Episode 5. Need to change "admins" to "admits".

Eee-yup. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JinzoClash (talk • contribs) 19:08, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 25 November 2012

Over a campfire, Rainbow Dash decides to share some imaginative and spooky tales, causing Scootaloo to have frightening, vivid nightmares; Scootaloo wants to get rid of her nightmares but doesn't want the others to think she is spineless. 68.224.24.161 (talk) 01:25, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. We also need reliable sources to support any changes you want made. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:06, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 4 December 2012

After Applejack saved Spike, he insists on fulfilling the Nobel Dragon Code by repaying him with excessive help around the farm. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.108.164.242 (talk • contribs) 4 December 2012

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 21:05, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Ratings???

I was just wondering the reason that the ratings column isn't included in these tables??--SexyKick 18:49, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean by "ratings". Can you give an example? ctzmsc3|talk 22:53, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mad_Men_episodes#Season_2_.282008.29 if you look here it shows the ratings in the right most column.--SexyKick 23:14, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

The number of US viewers? I don't think those numbers are all that important to have, but we could include them if a reliable source of figures can be found. ctzmsc3|talk 02:38, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I've looked around and I've only been able to find ratings for "The Return of Harmony" and "Hearts and Hooves Day", which is why I made those articles.--Gen. Quon (talk) 15:57, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

If this can get ratings citations, this article should be able to as well.--SexyKick 04:41, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

The question is, where would such ratings be published? dogman15 (talk) 10:37, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

The Hub has published some ratings but they are very inconsistent, and it would be mostly empty spots than actual data. Viewership #s are discussed on the main show page for those selected episodes. --MASEM (t) 14:22, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

While I have your attention, back in September I tried asking about the differences in colors on the episode tables. See here? No one has responded. Why are the colors on the "list of episodes" article different than the colors on the main article about this show? dogman15 (talk) 19:30, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 12 December 2012

At the end of the description for 'Magic Duel', there is a grammatical error. "Trixie apologies" should read "Trixie apologizes". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.86.197.162 (talk)

 Done I never thought I would have to do that (complete an unregistered user's edit request), but I just did. Also, sign your posts with four tildes, please. Like this: ~~~~ dogman15 (talk) 16:39, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Edit Request 31 December 2012

Corey Powell is the writer of "Just for the Sidekicks" - https://twitter.com/MMeghanMcCarthy/status/285811187881496577 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lusht (talk • contribs) 18:28, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Edit Request on 31 December 2012

Writer for ep13 is M.A. Larson: https://twitter.com/MMeghanMcCarthy/status/285817715648765952 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lusht (talk • contribs) 19:03, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Trivia

I think we should create a trivia section. It could contain:

• Facts
• Errors
• Episodes in which certain characters don't appear
• Special voice actors/actresses

What do you all think?

TehJayden (talk) 10:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

No, see WP:TRIVIA. We already note voice actors that are unique to episodes, and once we know all details of production order, we can include those numbers too, but "facts" and "errors" would be completely inapproprirate. --MASEM (t) 14:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Songs

When the song titles were first appeared here, I thought they were unnecessary, so I removed them. But now the result of the discussion is to merge list of FIM songs into this article, what about something like this, similar to the articles about stage musicals and feature-length musical films:

... she caught in desperate situation. ("Song Title", composer and lyrics writer information if necessary.) She then...

I think this is better than copying FIM Wikia entry. Awards? Move them to main My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic article. JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 15:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I was going to consider putting the songs in the appropriate episodes and listing the writer/composer (mostly Ingram) and vocalists, as extra info for each episode (note: not within the short prose of the article, as in some cases we'd have to write towards the inclusion of that fact, like "Perfect Stallion" for H&HD. I just don't have the credits immediately in front of me to do that. --MASEM (t) 15:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I know the proper credits for all the songs on this show. dogman15 (talk) 22:56, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for merging the song list so quickly! I was going to do it, but I'm glad to see it's already been taken care of! Yellow1996 (talk) 03:20, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 19 January 2013

Season 3 Episode 13 Magical Mystery Cure When Twilight casts a spell that switches the Cutie Marks and destinies, the only way to reverse the spell is by writing her own magic.

Fluttershy1989 (talk) 11:38, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Already done, before you made this comment. By Loveboy01 about 8 hours prior, actually. dogman15 (talk) 20:17, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Different Colors For Season 2 and 3

Can we change the color those episodes are outline in to something less blinding? That red and green are murder on the eyes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.68.27.177 (talk) 21:35, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Please see past discussion of this topic here, here, and here. If you want to change it, make the colors the same between both articles, preferably going with the old colors. dogman15 (talk) 02:23, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I concur. The previous colours were a lot more visually pleasing. Yellow1996 (talk) 02:21, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Again, please read those three past discussions of this issue, and if you change anything, make sure the colors are all the same across both articles. dogman15 (talk) 03:13, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

All right, I gave them a read. I may change them, and if I do then I will make sure they are consistent! Yellow1996 (talk) 22:50, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Season Colours

I've changed the colours for the seasons back to the original ones that we had before. The table on the Main page reflects this. --Yellow1996 (talk) 18:12, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Episode summaries

There is disagreement whether to include longer episode summaries in the episode lists. Per Template:Episode list summaries of 100-300 words are acceptable (which the ones I written were); further, the TV project guides suggests that such summaries should be complete, irregardless of spoilers per WP:MOSTV. User I7laseral has reverted these, stating the worsen the quality of the article as well as believe there should not be spoilers there. Unfortunately, the spoiler argument doesn't apply since we don't worry about spoiling the reader. --MASEM (t) 17:07, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

To put it simply, I am against long summaries on this page. It just so happens the long summaries end up being spoilers. I7laseral (talk) 18:20, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

But we don't care about spoilers, per WP:SPOILERS. Descriptions should be complete brief summaries. (And I won't argue that I may have had wordy descripts that could be cut down, but they wouldn't be as short as they are now). --MASEM (t) 18:27, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

I am against long summaries on this page. It just so happens the long summaries end up being spoilers. I7laseral (talk) 18:41, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

The episode summaries need to be longer as Wikipedia is a repository for future reference and knowledge not a household TV guide. Therefor we do not in any way care about spoilers, if you do not like spoilers then do not come here to read the page. The way the page is now, both the episode descriptions for episodes of season 1 and the aired episodes of season 3 are longer than the episodes of season 2 which makes the article look incomplete and inconsistent. For those who think that longer summaries reduce the quality of the article then perhaps they (and I) should work on making higher quality summaries but one way or another the summary lengths need to be standard across all seasons or this article will never look professional. --Violettsureme (talk) 18:46, 10 November 2012 (UTC) Well, the descriptions for aired episodes of season 3 were longer for a while there. --Violettsureme (talk) 18:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

There are going to be length variances. S1 plots were simpler than S2 so they dont need as much to describe. But yea, it can't be 1-2 sentence descriptions against paragraph-length ones. --MASEM (t) 18:56, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Heres my biggest point of all that I just now realized. Its all UNSOURCED. Therefore you must only put down the summary that zapit says. Not your own. I7laseral (talk) 18:59, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

No, actually. 1) We are not allowed to repeat exactly what zap2it says save for unaired episodes; as soon as it airs we have to rewrite the summary in our own words. 2) Plot summaries do not require sourcing, as it is assumed the episode is the primary work that can be referenced from. And even if you don't accept this, 3) All S1-S2 can be sourced to the SFWeekly column on the show, which I believe it also being done through S3 for sure. So no, this is not a valid argument. --MASEM (t) 19:03, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Any WP for your second point? I7laseral (talk) 19:04, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

It's long standing consensus (look at other articles on works of fiction and look for citations with the plot summary. They are only used on points of contention). --MASEM (t) 19:17, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

For future reference, List of Twin Peaks episodes is a featured article and does not use citations in its plot blurbs. It is reasonable to assume those plot synopses came right from the show itself. The only things using sources are the lead paragraph, viewership statistics, various dates and episode titles. Just thought I'd back-up Masem's point here. LazyBastardGuy 23:49, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Once again, I7laseral is reverteed episode synopsis additions. I agree they need to be short, which right now for S3 they are (4-5 lines/sentences at most). But any concerns about being spoilers is disregarded by [[WP:SPOILER|the fact WP doesn't care if things are spoiled or not. And again, while upcoming episodes are okay to use the text description of the episode provided by the Hub or Zap2TV or any other show listing, as soon as the epiosde airs, we have to paraphrase the episode in our own words otherwise it is a copyvio. --MASEM (t) 05:38, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposal for episode pages

I see that several episodes (eg. Hearts and Hooves Day, The Cutie Mark Chronicles, etc.) all have their own pages. However, the pilot episode of the series does not have its own page. I feel as if it should as it is a very important episode in the series. I also think that due to the general like of the series, more episode pages should be created, especially with Magical Mystery Cure coming up, which itself should have a page when it is released (due to The Hub promoting it extensively). --TheAryeLynet (talk) 16:35, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

To have an individual episode article, we need to have sources on their reception first and foremost. The few that do are ones that do have this. I would agree that MMC will probably and likely can have based on yesterday's ew.com article its own article, but I still would wait until it airs and we see what sources come about from it. The pilot unfortunately (and somewhat surprisingly) does not have much reception directed at it itself, so we're really unable to make an article about it at this time. --MASEM (t) 16:50, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

With this article on the brony reaction to the alicorn news, I'm pretty sure we'll be able to have an article (in addition to Hub's pomp) for the MMC episode. We'll just wait until after it airs to add it). --MASEM (t) 02:31, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Okay, Who's the Wise Guy

Who edited all of the entries to show the entire plot summaries rather than the teasers used to explain the episode's premise? 99.52.200.110 (talk) 06:00, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

WP does not hide spoilers, per WP:SPOILER. --MASEM (t) 15:27, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Well it certainly seems to me rather pointless to edit it when the teaser was enough to explain what the episode was. Oh well. I guess some people want to know what's going on without having to watch anything. 99.52.200.110 (talk) 06:53, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Splitting list of episodes into season pages?

The whole list is getting longer, and the upcoming fourth season is a reason for splitting the long list into season pages. That way, you can put episodes and songs into each season page. --George Ho (talk) 23:21, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

It's difficult to source the individual seasons, making splits improper due to notability. The length is fine, even with 26 more episodes. --MASEM (t) 23:58, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Princess Cadance (correct spelling)

I've just corrected the wrong (Cadence) spelling and replaced it with the right one. We actually had both in this article, and over at the list of characters page we have Cadance spelt properly. In the credits of the most recent episodes it was clearly spelt with the 'a' and not 'e'. Please add any questions/comments/concerns below. Thanks! --Yellow1996 (talk) 20:30, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Every official media since the wedding episode have been Cadance. There may be sources close to its airing that have it the other way, but the long tail is the 'a' spelling, and the one we should stick with. (Similarly how we can refer to Queen Chrysalis since that's her name since the episode even if it wasn't mentioned in it then). --MASEM (t) 20:33, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that was my understanding as well. I wonder when it got changed? (I've been monitoring this page much longer than I've been contributing to it regularly!) But a quick look in the history should tell all. Not that it's a big deal now that we've established the correct one! :) --Yellow1996 (talk) 20:37, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

On a personal note, I hate the "Cadance" spelling. It isn't natural, and it looks weird. But this isn't the place for opinions, is it? At any rate, I can't do anything about it. dogman15 (talk) 07:22, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I kinda like Cadance better. Do you think it's unnatural because of wikt:cadence? I guess it sort of makes sense in that context. But yes, in any case we've got to maintain a neutral POV and changing characters names around is certainly not the way to do it!! :) --Yellow1996 (talk) 18:05, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Text Colour over at the Season 3 Page

A few days ago I put up a request for discussion in regards to whether we should have black or white text for the table on our season 3 page(which also effects this page.) Since cross-posting is generally regarded as bad practice, I'll just post a link to the discussion. It's here for any users interested. Thanks! --Yellow1996 (talk) 17:29, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

S4 start date

Entertainment Weekly's exact quote is "this winter". I can understand for those in the southern hemisphere that that hasn't happened yet, but EW is a North American publication. Our winter ends tomorrow (March 20). Even if we consider through the end of March, there's no evidence at all that new MLP episodes are scheduled for airing (which their would have been by now). Thus, when ew.com says "this winter", they're meaning "this upcoming winter" or Q1 '14 (perhaps as early as late December 2013, but the date is too vague to make guesses like that).

This is why we avoid using seasonal terms for timeframes on WP, because of the northern/southern hemisphere confusion that it generates. --MASEM (t) 01:47, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

100% agree. Besides, 10+ months between seasons is a little extreme (in my opinion), and I highy doubt it is accurate; unless of course if Hasbro is planning something big. But yes, in any case those timeframes are much too vague for use in the article. --Yellow1996 (talk) 16:18, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

I searched around quite a bit and found nothing besides speculation. The article in question makes it seem (to me at least) that it is an event happening soon; Q4 2013/Q1 2014 isn't soon. Strange. The Season 4 paragraph was just removed and replaced with this but I don't want to start an edit war. There needs to be more discussion on this page. Any thoughts? --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:36, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Outright removal of the information makes no sense, since while we have a S4 release, knowing when word about S4 started circulating by reliable sources can tell when it was in production. I've put it back. --MASEM (t) 03:22, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Good call. I'll revert anything contrary if I come across it. --Yellow1996 (talk) 18:06, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

The Hubs' PR for their 2013-14 schedule that I sourced specifically says "early 2014", removing any issue on the impreciseness. --MASEM (t) 04:47, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Okay that's a relief. -wait, what am I saying?! We have to wait all the way until then? Arrgghh!!! ;) Oh well, at least we know now for sure. --Yellow1996 (talk) 16:09, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Merge suggestion for song list

Please do not archive this discussion until proposal is resolved

Hi. I see there's a merge suggestion in the Song list section of this article. The "Discuss" link directs to the talk page of the main article and I could be overlooking the discussion, but I can't find it anywhere (there or here). Can someone direct me to the discussion (if there is one)? Otherwise, I'd suggest removing the template if the proposing editor still has not started a discussion to better explain their proposal by now. I'm not necessarily against a merge, but I think the onus should be on the proposing editor to explain themselves, rather than to tack one hidden sentence onto the template without taking the time to create a section for a discussion to begin (that's not my, or anyone else's, responsibility).--- Crakkerjakk (talk) 05:39, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't know where it was, but my suggestion is that we move each song to be in the episode it belongs in, along with appropriate credits; the intro songs would be mentioned on the main show page. --MASEM (t) 05:47, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Makes sense. I don't have any objections, but some people may still want to create some sort of table listing the songs on this page, so I'd suggest giving this discussion a month or so, and then if there are no reasonable objections, you could go ahead with the merge. Since I can't find any other discussion on the subject, I'll redirect the link in the template here to generate a consensus (if anyone cares). --- Crakkerjakk (talk) 06:14, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

If there was an official soundtrack, I'd be more inclined to agree there, but as it is , some of the "songs" listed are really not the type of songs that would appear in that manner; hence why the table format isn't really good for that listing right now. --MASEM (t) 06:19, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

No, I personally don't see any urgent need for a table, but I was just speculating with regards to how other editors might react to the proposal (I can't speak for them). Like I said, if there aren't any legitimate objections by auto-confirmed editors within the next month or so, then I'd say just go for it. --- Crakkerjakk (talk) 06:36, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree with putting each respective song with the episode it belongs to. Isn't that how we used to have it, around this time last year?(that's when I first visited this page.) So yeah, that suggestion makes sense to me. --Yellow1996 (talk) 18:58, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Wasn't that the My Little Pony FIM wiki? For some reason I half disagree, because I don't think it belongs on the episode section, and yet at the same time I half agree, because I think there isn't any other article on which it can go to. Anechka2003 (talk) 22:42, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

No, I hadn't visited the My Little Pony FIM wiki until relatively recently; I'm positive that we had it like that on this very page on Wikipedia around January-February of last year. I could try and find it in the page history. As a side note, the songs would have to be merged into the season pages (which didn't exist at the time of this proposal) rather than this central list of episodes page since all the detailed information is over at those pages now. --Yellow1996 (talk) 18:09, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I poked around the history and turned up nothing. Maybe it was only like that for a very short time, and it was just a coincidence that I happened to see it. If I find the correct revision eventually I'll put it up here as an example. --Yellow1996 (talk) 19:12, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, thanks for the info anyway.

26 episodes not really confirmed

By the way, we have actually no reliable source for affirming Season 4 will be 26 episodes long; the one (weak) source for it is long gone. I deleted the info. -- / Kàmina / 18:51, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, the episode count isn't mentioned in either the EW article or The Hub's 2013-2014 schedule. However, there's really no reason why Season 4 shouldn't have 26 episodes (the standard); but that's OR on our part. --Yellow1996 (talk) 19:08, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Dogman15 inserted a link providing Ingram's credit list PDF. I don't think it's our standard to cite documents hosted on Mediafire, though, since their authenticity can't be explicitly proved; even so, should we regard this as enough proof that S4 will be 26 episodes long (don't get me wrong, I'm convinced it will be, but it doesn't really matter what I think)? As Masem pointed out, the original document was purposely removed; what if they did so because it was incorrect? Anyhow, I don't think that that link is a good source. -- / Kàmina / 16:17, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm... that's tricky. I don't think it really matters if the document is hosted on Mediafire or somewhere else. I say leave it unless there are more objections. --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:10, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

The fact Ingram (or his webmaster) took it down after it was discovered should be a sign we shouldn't be relying on that source for 26 episodes, even if the document is hosted elsewhere. We know we have S4 coming, but we just can't say reliably it will be 26 eps. --MASEM (t) 16:22, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, one could assume that if it was removed then maybe the reason is "confidentiality" - they don't want us knowing the exact count yet. So I guess we should leave it as N/A or TBA for now. --Yellow1996 (talk) 21:30, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

I see no compelling evidence that Season 4 won't have 26 episodes. You deletionists (I use that term jokingly) have your frizzies in a tizzy. Anyway, until Daniel or his webmaster fix his site, we can't link to it anyway, and I think once it is fixed, he'll have a PDF of his credits again, with future seasons of shows he's worked on listed. I would recommend just listing "26" without any citations, since that's what we all know and assume (rightly and justifiably) it to be, until proven otherwise. dogman15 (talk) 20:28, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

It is true that 26 episodes is the standard episode count for a season. (I think this applies to many animated shows, though this is really the only one I am an "expert" on. ;) ) - and I really don't have a problem leaving it as "26" until that site comes back on and we can verify for sure(which I am sure we will be able to.) It doesn't really cause any problems. Perhaps I'm not a hard core "deletionist" after all? :) --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:12, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Additionally, Meghan McCarthy and Steffan Andrews were making joke tweets today about future season 4 synopses and titles. Despite the fact that they were joking on April 1st, it stands to reason that they wouldn't make up exactly 26 fake episodes if the real FiM season 4 didn't have exactly 26 episodes. Food for thought. dogman15 (talk) 05:50, 2 April 2013 (UTC) And a bonus! Look at how List of Littlest Pet Shop (2012 TV series) episodes handles it. No citation at all, and everyone's happy. dogman15 (talk) 08:58, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm still pro-deletion, simply because no reliable sources exist to support an info that IMHO currently fails to comply with WP:BALL. That being said, in case the majority has a different opinion, I'm not going to object leaving the information unsourced: it's the Mediafire thing what perplexes me the most. -- / Kàmina / 09:18, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll delete the citation and link to the PDF I re-hosted, but I'm leaving the 26 by itself, and I hope it stays that way. dogman15 (talk) 09:42, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok, looks good. :) --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:11, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Citation for Season 3 DVD "this winter"?

What is the source?

Zestanor (talk) 21:14, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Suspect someone had considered that the S4 starting date (which is coming from the Ent. Weekly article). Removing since no sites state news of an S3 yet. --MASEM (t) 22:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Merge suggestion for song list (revisited)

I noticed that down in the song section we still have the merge template from January, reccomending a merge to either the production section on the main page (which I don't think is a good idea due to that section being very large and a song list just wouldn't fit) or into the episode descriptions which at the time were on this page but are now at our three season pages (discussed here.) It's been well over a month and there hasn't been much input in regards to the proposed merge. The song tables in the season pages are working quite well, in my opinion. So should we remove the merge template, or is there still more discussion to be done? --Yellow1996 (talk) 20:53, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

I say remove the "merge" template. dogman15 (talk) 21:48, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok I went ahead and removed it. It's easy enough to put back if needed, but I doubt it. --Yellow1996 (talk) 21:56, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

My word is clear: Merge production details into main MLP FIM article, integrate song titles into episode summary (like this), and remove song list from this article and related sub-articles. Do the same for Littlest Pet Shop. JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 07:32, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree that it is better to present each song (with full production details, eg crediting Ingram, Anderson, Andrews, and any appropriate singers) as a bulleted list for each specific episode, instead of the standalone table per season. The theme song details should be on the main article page. At least until we have an actual soundtrack retail product that we can talk about. --MASEM (t) 13:47, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh okay I misunderstood. Just the production details to the main page would work. As for the song tables I am not against moving them into each episode's individual description; I only brought this up because I had seen no current discussion on this page regarding the merge. If anyone wants to go ahead and carry it out then I support it. --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:46, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Personally, I like the current arrangement of a unique song table for each season, but I'm in the minority, and that's okay. I always have this I can refer to. dogman15 (talk) 15:29, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, my opinion is pretty much ambiguous at this point. Basically I like the tables but if someone wants to try the bulleted lists out then I will not object. It's really too bad that I couldn't find the old version of this page that I thought had that very layout. If anyone is interested in looking, I'm positive it was between January and June of last year. Wikia has the exact time the songs start but not the characters that sing them?! Cool! we have something they don't! :) --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:30, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

The "who sings them" part is on each song's individual article. Now all we need to add if we want to be even is song start times, or maybe song durations. dogman15 (talk) 03:33, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I see now! :) Well, we could try to "get even" with them; though things like song start times are usually the types of things which are deemed "too crufty" for wikipedia (I personally disagree...) but I can't see how song durations could hurt - I'd like to see both added! ;) --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:11, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

If (when?) we get an official soundtrack, we can likely quickly create a page for that and the song list would make sense there. But for now, the basics should be the composers and singers, as to give credit where credit is due. Things like timing, etc. doesn't matter at this point. --MASEM (t) 01:17, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, that makes sense. I think we'll eventually get some kind of offical soundtrack released (though the completeness of the tracks included is anyone's guess... :) ) - my above comment was just my crazy fan self getting caught up in things... ;) --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:31, 13 April 2013 (UTC)