Talk:NCIS: New Orleans

Several issues

I have to give my views here (and full explanations of my recent edits).

1. Cast and characters – Either the heading is misnamed or the list is formatted wrong. If the section is about the characters (as it is), then the heading should be "Characters". If it's supposed to be a "Cast and characters" list, then it would be just that -- the cast members followed by the characters they play. But, since it's not, the sub-heading should be "Main characters", because otherwise the reader is likely to automatically assume that it's a cast list. And that's not just an assumption about the reader; it's coming from personal experience. If it happened to me, then it most likely would happen to others as well.
2. "Special guest appearances" – This section really is not needed -- but if it's going to be here, then it really should be as a guest stars list, because that's what it's about. These are not characters in this series.
3. Ratings – This table doesn't belong. We don't give ratings for every episode -- except for what's already in the Episodes section. It's unnecessary repetition. Also, episodes shouldn't be shown (they can be hidden) until they have aired. And all the TBA, TBA... is just stupid-looking.
4. JAG navbox – I doesn't matter if the series is named in the box itself, if there's nothing in this article's body about it, then the navbox really shouldn't be there.

--Musdan77 (talk) 02:26, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

1. The section contains both cast and characters so there is no ambiguity. It really doesn't matter what you call the section; "Cast", "Characters", "Cast and characters" all work.
2. As I explained on your talk page, this article contains the elements you'd expecting in a main series article, a list of characters article and a list of episodes article, because the subject only has a single article at this time. When and if List of NCIS: New Orleans characters is eventually created, the "Special guest appearances" section will be moved there. Regarding "These are not characters in this series", the section is formatted so that it is consistent with thef formatting in the "Characters" section. This has the added advantage as providing some context regarding the characters' appearances.
3. Actually, we do give ratings for each episode. We have a special parameter in {{Episode list}} for viewer figures and if there are additional ratings figures we create a separate ratings table, like this. WP:TVRECEPTION says "the season and episode articles could contain a list of ratings for all the episodes". Including additional detail is all about providing real-world reception of a TV series. I've said it already but I have to say it again, as I explained on your talk page, this article contains the elements you'd expecting in a main series article, a list of characters article and a list of episodes article. When and if List of NCIS: New Orleans episodes is created, the ratings table will be moved there and when and if NCIS: New Orleans (season 1) is created, it will be moved again to that article. However, it won't disappear completely. It will be replaced by a table similar to that seen at NCIS (TV series)#Ratings and/or NCIS: Los Angeles#Ratings (likely the latter).
4. Navboxes facilitate navigation between related articles. There's no requirement regarding content in the articles, they just have to be related and these articles are (grandparents and grandchildren are still related). {{JAG television}} contains links to all the NCIS series articles and the template is used in all of them. --AussieLegend (✉) 11:29, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

1) Wrong. There are definite differences (WP:MOSTV). The section here is only about the characters. The cast members are only parentheticals. 2) No, it may be different if you were talking about a List of cast members article, but it would not belong on a List of characters article -- unless they became recurring characters (which I doubt they would). 3) Yes, it says "the season and episode articles". As I said, "the Episodes section" has a row for ratings. Anything more is unnecessary and mostly redundant. And you keep saying "when and if". We are not to assume things about the future. An encyclopedia is about what has happened, not what might happen. -Musdan77 (talk) 17:57, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Regardless of being parentheticals, cast and characters are both listed. We typically only list actors as parentheticals. The section heading for WP:TVCAST is "Cast information" and says "In a section labeled either "Cast and characters", "Cast list" or "List of characters", we indicate noteworthy characters, including the name of the actor who portrayed the character, followed by a brief description of the character". Did you check the MOS before citing it? WP:TVCAST also applies to a list of characters article. You're ignoring the fact that this article currently is the season and episode article. We don't start listing individual episode ratings once we have a separate article. We start when episodes start airing and when there is sufficient content to justify a split we move the information into the new article. That's a fundamental aspect of building and splitting articles. The episode section does not have "a row for ratings". it has a single cell in the table for overall viewer figures, which aren't ratings. That's why we have a separate table for them. If we can list future episodes in the episode table, there's no reason we can't list future episodes in the ratings table. --AussieLegend (✉) 09:21, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

"Did you check the MOS before citing it?" I didn't think I would need to. I see that someone very recently removed/moved the "Character listing" section, and made the changes that you quoted without discussing for consensus first. But remember that that is only a guide. It's not saying that it's the way every article has to be. I meant to say, "a column for ratings" -- but you're right; it's not actually a column either and it's not actually ratings, but I think it's all that's needed. "If we can list future episodes in the episode table, there's no reason we can't list future episodes in the ratings table." We "can" do almost anything on Wikipedia (subject to being challenged or reverted). The question is, "what should be done". I don't think that future episodes should be added, and I certainly don't think that they should be added to a ratings table. It's common sense. The whole purpose for a ratings table is to show the ratings. There can't be ratings if it hasn't aired yet.--Musdan77 (talk) 20:54, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

dvr ratings

Can someone put a column in the Ratings chart for Live+7 data? Thanks Berymtambta (talk) 21:39, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Related show

Why should't NCIS: LA states as related show? They are part of the same franchise. Also, on pages of other franchises (for example CSI shows) they are all stated as related.Maticsg1 (talk) 18:26, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

I agree with you. NCIS: LA is a related show and it is the first spin-off. Even the Star Trek page has the spin-offs as related. Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 18:43, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

The instructions for {{Infobox television}} say that the |related= parameter is for remakes, spin-offs, adaptations for different audiences, etc. ... Note that simply sharing crossover episodes does not make series related. This series is a spin-off from NCIS. That's it. It is not a remake, spin-off, or adaptation of NCIS: Los Angeles. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:46, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Exactly, it ends with "etc." Since practicly every franchise has listed other shows from the same franchise, it seems like a practice to do so. It is not contradicting the instructions. The shows are related. Maticsg1 (talk) 18:52, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

"etc." simply allows for variations beyond remakes, spin-offs, and adaptations, but the intent is clear - it is talking about projects downstream of the subject, not upstream and around to siblings, cousins, grandparents etc. --AussieLegend (✉) 19:17, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

As discussed here: Template talk:Infobox television, it is still related, even though it is not exactly a spin-off (example given Agents of SHIELD, Agent Carter). Other examples that exist on Wikipedia are: CSI franchise, Chicago P.D./Med/Fire, The Flash/Arrow/Legends of Tomorrow... Maticsg1 (talk) 19:33, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Did you notice that I started that discussion? WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS applies here. Just because other editors haven't bothered to read the template instructions, something I mentioned at the discussion, doesn't justify misapplying the instructions here. --AussieLegend (✉) 19:54, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes I have, and you do not disagree that Agents of SHIELD and Agent Carter are related, even though Agent Carter is not a spin-off. Maybe it is you who misinterpreting the guidelines and not majority of the editors. And I do think that I am making a legitimate comparisons (as per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). Maticsg1 (talk) 20:07, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't know enough about Agents of SHIELD and Agent Carter to know whether they're related although, based on the comments at the discussion, I assume that they don't actually fit the infobox definition of related. In any case, as I've already indicated, that's WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. And no, I'm pretty sure I'm not misinterpreting the instructions as should be obvious from the discussion. I've written some of those instructions and recently modified the infobox code when we merged it with {{infobox television film}}, so I do know how it's supposed to work. --AussieLegend (✉) 05:08, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I can understand the confusion, but being in the same franchise doesn't necessarily make them related. New Orleans is a spin-off of NCIS, not Los Angeles; and, maybe more importantly, they don't have the same creators, production companies and producers. They're only technically in the same franchise. It's fine for it to be mentioned in the main body, but it doesn't belong in the infobox. --Musdan77 (talk) 18:31, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I kind of forgot about this discussion, anyhow, I still think they are related because they belong to the same franchise, but I understand what both of you are trying to say and as far as I'm concerned, the article/infobox is fine as it is now. Maticsg1 (talk) 01:10, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Mclellan leaving

http://www.nevadaappeal.com/news/23048811-113/black-a-natural-fit-for-acting-and-acc#

Black said there’s one change in the cast. Zoe McLellan, who played Meredith Brody on the show, has left.

Cantab1985 (talk) 06:48, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

No other sources to support her departure. --Drmargi (talk) 07:43, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes that's why I placed it in talk.Cantab1985 (talk) 07:49, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

The source really isn't reliable, given its a small newspaper reporting a second-hand comment. It may be true, but absent any verification from the major entertainment media sites, it's best left out for the time being. --Drmargi (talk) 18:39, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on NCIS: New Orleans. 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 http://www.webcitation.org/6SrF81P6B?url=http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/09/24/tuesday-final-ratings-marvels-agents-of-s-h-i-e-l-d-forever-the-voice-and-dancing-with-the-stars-adjusted-up-chicago-fire-person-of-interest-adjusted-down/306586/ to http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/09/24/tuesday-final-ratings-marvels-agents-of-s-h-i-e-l-d-forever-the-voice-and-dancing-with-the-stars-adjusted-up-chicago-fire-person-of-interest-adjusted-down/306586/
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6YifxgqG8?url=http://deadline.com/2015/05/2014-15-full-tv-season-ratings-shows-rankings-1201431167/ to http://deadline.com/2015/05/2014-15-full-tv-season-ratings-shows-rankings-1201431167/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/series/ncis-new-orleans/seasons-episodes/AA4qYyE

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) 17:37, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Crossovers

Can a crossover table be added like on NCIS: Los Angeles? Mn1548 (talk) 09:46, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Why was NCIS New Orleans cancelled, one of the best!!!

Can it be revived? 2603:6080:8801:A095:9156:720E:B54B:8D9A (talk) 12:09, 20 April 2024 (UTC)