Template talk:Infobox television season/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Format adjustments to deal with title wrap and a new parameter

I'd like to formally request implementation of changes first discussed here as well as above (and further discussed on my talk page here). Through edits by myself and Gonnym, the sandbox version of the infobox has the proposed visual changes. The visual changes will add season/series info as a subheader in the infobox. With the adjustment, if an article has additional disambiguation in it's page title (such as Hawaii Five-O (1968 TV series, season 1)), only "Season 1" will appear now. The main heading takes its name from PAGENAMEBASE or the |season_name= overrride. The subheading takes it's info from |season_number=, and a new alias for it called |series_number= has been created if "Series" needs to be used over "Season". For an article like The Challenge: Rivals that currently doesn't have season info show, but will have "Season 21" seen with this change, should that be undesired, |season_number= can be removed. Please see the mockup examples below of what these all look like.

Examples
Old Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. (season 3) New Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. Season 3 Old Hawaii Five-O (1968 TV series, season 1) New Hawaii Five-O Season 1 Old Celebrity Big Brother (British series 15) New (with new series_number parameter) Celebrity Big Brother Series 15 Old Rivals New Rivals Season 21

Additionally, in looking through Category:Infobox television season articles that use the season name parameter to ensure these changes will work, it was determined that the parameter |native_name= should be added much like the main infobox. This was specifically to help I Can See Your Voice (South Korean season 1) and the other season articles for this show, but I'm sure other seasons might benefit from this as well. Pinging the additional editors from the previous 2 discussions, along with a notice at the TV project talk page. @Alucard 16, Brojam, Alex 21, and Adamstom.97:. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:36, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

FWIW, I generally approve of the suggested changes. However, I'm not sure that dropping "British" from the "Celebrity Big Brother (British series 15)" example is a good idea – I would say that if "by country" disambiguation like that is needed for the article title, it should be included in the infobox as well... Something similar may also apply to the Hawaii Five-ZERO example, though I feel less strongly about it. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:45, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

A lot of the articles added to Category:Infobox television season articles that use the season name parameter are by editors who wish to remove the disambiguation from the infobox, and I personally understand that. When you view the article, the article title and disambiguation are important as it tells you where you are, but the infobox is not for that. Just as you wouldn't write in the lead "Celebrity Big Brother (British TV series)". Aside from that, both the country and the year are already parameters in the infobox - |country= and |released=, so both can handle any leftover confusion. --Gonnym (talk) 18:36, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

I'd also add that if the stylistic change is agreed upon, should there be further discussion as to what is actually kept in the subheading, that can be fine tuned. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:23, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

And I'm not sure I agree with that – the infobox should be a summary of relevant info, and to me "British series 15" vs. "Australian series 5" is relevant info to include in the infobox. So, if/when there are followup discussions, hopefully someone will drop a note in WT:TV, as I'll want to weigh in in favor of keeping at least the "by country" disambig. in the infobox title. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:12, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

@IJBall: We can keep discussing this further. I agree to an extent about keeping country in the infobox. If you have something like The Office (American season 2) where that article exists, but as of yet, The Office (British series 2) doesn't, to me it would be okay to have American The Office just have "Season 2". But I think to your point, which to me I think might be geared more towards competition shows, keeping the country dab might be necessary. So something like Big Brother 1 (American season) and Big Brother (Australian season 1). Perhaps the solve is just using an override field for the subheader in the instance where we would like the country dab to stay? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:42, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Actually looking at the various articles that have multiple versions like The Office and the Big Brother franchise I don't think we need a country disambiguator in the title of the infobox. These articles are doing a very good job of explaining which version of the show (i.e. American or British) it is in the lead sentence. The infobox also has the country = field for "Country of origin" which should be more than enough for the infobox. Realty shows like Survivor have a custom field indicating the location where the show was filmed when outside of the country of origin. Having a country disambiguator or the country in the title of the infobox is redundant given how many times the articles usually point out if the season/series is of American, Canadian, British, etc. The only exceptions should be seasons like Big Brother Canada (season 8) where the country name is part of the show. Similarly shows like Hawaii Five-0 and the British version of Love Island don't need the year disambiguation as the season/series articles are doing a good job of clarifying things in the lead and where appropriate hatnotes are being used to avoid confusion. Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} 04:01, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Would be great if we could make similar changes to {{Infobox reality talent competition}}. - 17:48, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Support this proposal. --Gonnym (talk) 18:36, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

@Gonnym: should there be consensus to do this, we need to add in |native_name=. Do you have thoughts on placement in the infobox? I was thinking as "subheader2", but we could follow the main template's example and have it be below any image. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:23, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Below the image is my preference. While it's important, non-English text that is probably not readable by most of the readers shouldn't be one of the first things you see. It's also nice that it's consistent across TV infoboxes. --Gonnym (talk) 20:41, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

I have been pushing to get a change like this made for some time, and I support this proposal. Regarding removing the disambig from the infobox, I feel like that is the standard approach. I can't think of any examples of where we would want to include disambig in a film, series, or person infobox. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:56, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

I give 100% support to this proposal looks very good. I also echo the request any changes made to this infobox be applied to {{Infobox reality talent competition}} as well. Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} 04:01, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

@Alucard 16 and Brojam: I'm just curious what you feel needs to be applied from this to the reality infobox? That already has a heading for "Series/Season {{{season}}}" that I think is similar to what we're doing here. We are adding the native name parameter which can easily be added there. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:01, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Ya, the changes to the reality talent infobox wouldn't be as big visually speaking. It's minor things so they are both visually and stylistically consistent. So moving the season heading to directly below the main heading; currently it's under the logo/image and a smaller font-size. As well, using PAGENAMEBASE for the name and having the |season_name= override and new |native_name= parameter. Also, replacing |season= with |season_number= and adding its alias |series_number= instead of using |british=yes and |australian=yes. Thinking more about it, is there a reason why the {{Infobox reality talent competition}} isn't just a module to {{Infobox television season}} like {{Infobox reality competition season}}? (Sorry if this has already been discussed) - Brojam (talk) 20:34, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

@Brojam: you may be on to something. In my eyes, {{Infobox reality talent competition}} and {{Infobox reality competition season}} seem to serve the same purpose, with the former more for "talent" competitions and the latter for other reality series (Big Brother, Survivor, etc). Honestly those 2 should merge to be one module to this infobox. If we make the style change here, why don't we deal with that next, because then the changes here won't really have to jump over if we're merging them. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:05, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good. - Brojam (talk) 23:34, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I think we have consensus to add the subheader (with simply "Season/Series #") and I don't believe |native_name= was controversial, so I think we can go ahead and implement this change. Gonnym are you able to do so, since this is locked for those without template editing rights? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:39, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Should be done now. Let me know if I missed something as I couldn't copy the sandbox because of a conflict... cause by me --Gonnym (talk) 18:11, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

It looks okay. I've adjusted articles that were in the season_name tracking category that no longer needed them. Everything seems to be working as expected. Editors will have to go in and switch season_number to series_number as necessary, or maybe a bot can help with that. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:32, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Further updates

There needs to be further updates. Doctor Who (season 12) and Doctor Who (series 12) both list as "Season 12"; the latter is "Series 12". "Season" should not be assumed by the template. I am aware that |series_number= now exists, but the updates should apply automatically. -- /Alex/₂₁ 10:01, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

They do. Just don't use any parameter. The code assumes that if you use an override parameter that you have a reason for doing it. The doc even says The season number (The Xth season of this particular program), defaults to the page name. Set this parameter if the page name does not have the season number information.. If we could get consensus here (and if it's possible) to have PrimeBot remove the |season_number= and |show_name= parameters from pages where the value is the same as the page name (with or without disambiguation) and on the way also replace |show_name2= with |alt_name=, that could solve some problems and make the code a bit more cleaner. --Gonnym (talk) 10:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Okay, makes sense. Cheers. What about articles such as Doctor Who (2008–2010 specials)? How do I get the subheader to display just "2008–2010 specials"? -- /Alex/₂₁ 14:13, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

I'd support the bot going through to remove parameters as needed. Doctor Who (2008-2010 specials) appears to be an outlier case that we did not know about when we were brainstorming this change. Perhaps we need |sub_header= as an overrride parameter for these minor instances? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:43, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Are there any other examples of valid uses of this infobox that should have a text other than "season/series #"? If it's just this, I think I could code it so if it fails to find a season number, it will look for a year range and if it finds it, use the disambiguation from the page name. I'd rather handle this in the code than add a parameter that can be misused. --Gonnym (talk) 16:07, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

For articles I watch, I can't think of any instance where "Season/Series" should not be used. As I said, when we were testing this, I thought we found all cases, so perhaps the Doctor Who one is the only outlier. And then I guess any other "non-standard" articles using the season template. I'll see if I can explore that. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:34, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Okay quickly looking at articles using the season template, I've found: List of The Colbert Report episodes (2005–06), List of The Colbert Report episodes (2007), and List of The Daily Show episodes (2006) as examples that have the subheading displaying incorrect text. But these fall within your date range idea. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:39, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Another Jack Horkheimer: Star Hustler (1997 season). I do believe all of these late night talk show articles and ones like this Jack Horkheimer all uses/will need dates in the subheading. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:45, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Ok, let me tinker around with the code. I got the Doctor Who to work, but these are different, they don't use a range. --Gonnym (talk) 16:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

So I got the above examples to work, but I'll give my frank opinion on this, I think it both looks bad and is also needlessly duplicates data. For lists such as List of The Colbert Report episodes (2005–06), what the sub-header shows is "2005-06". The infobox already has a first_aired-last_aired field which is exactly this. Jack Horkheimer: Star Hustler (1997 season) is a bit more better in that is shows "1997 season" but again, we already know the year from the same field. I'd personally prefer that the sub-header stay a "what season this was" field and not a extra header to use for colorful reasons. Both the Colbert and Jack Horkheimer infoboxes can actually gain something from adding the relevant |season_number= information so a reader (such as myself) will be able to understand what season this was right from the infobox. Again, Doctor Who is somewhat different here in that is actually gives an additional piece of information that it's about the specials. --Gonnym (talk) 17:18, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Gonnym I was just looking over the season_name tracking category, and came across Ben 10: Omniverse (story arc 1). I believe we can solve this by just moving the article to have (season 1) as the dab, but if we can't, what do you make of this? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:59, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Added functionality. Though I agree with you about the article title. --Gonnym (talk) 20:07, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

@Favre1fan93: missed the ping. --Gonnym (talk) 20:07, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Automatic italicization of List of Episodes

We need to take a look at the regex used for |episode_list= and its automatic italicization. There's issues caused when LoE articles with years at the end are linked; examples of this can be seen at articles such as The Simpsons (season 1) and Doctor Who (series 12), where the LoE appears as List of The Simpsons episodes (seasons 1–20) and List of Doctor Who episodes (2005–present) respectively. That is, "episodes" should not be italicized. -- /Alex/₂₁ 08:09, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

• @Alex 21: I've done some work that you can check with the sandbox version. What it does is as follows:

1. If the |episode_list= parameter is empty, it generates the list of episode title based on the current page title without the season disambiguation. You can check this on Lost (season 1) by removing the parameter.
2. If the parameter is set it uses it and italics the series name based on the current page title. You can also check this on Lost (season 1).
3. Works also when the season has extended disambiguation. You can check this on Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2012 TV series, season 1).
4. If the parameter is used and the link has an additional seasons range, it uses it. You can check this on The Simpsons (season 1) and Doctor Who (series 12).
5. In any case it only shows the link if the page exists.

Let me know if you have any comments. --Gonnym (talk) 12:42, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Gonnym, perfect, thank you! I recall implementing the wikicode regex, but that was too long ago to remember how I went about it, and moving it to module code is a great idea. Looks like it's readt to implement, then. -- /Alex/₂₁ 23:09, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Done. If any errors show up, revert and link to the page with the error and I'll look into it. --Gonnym (talk) 00:44, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Gonnym, could you check Strike the Blood II, Strike the Blood III, ... Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 12:18, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Sure. Checking them now. --Gonnym (talk) 12:19, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Gonnym, also Nura: Rise of the Yokai Clan - Demon Capital isn't showing a link to the episode list. I am finding these while cleaning up Category:Pages with script errors which is finding all the pages where the episode list is linked. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 12:23, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

I've made a change earlier that fixed an error so most of these just need to be purged. But the first one you posted is a real issue. --Gonnym (talk) 12:27, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Gonnym, Is there a tracking category for when the episode list linking fails? Like Coke Studio (Pakistani season 2), for example? Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 12:52, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Or ones that need to be delinked like Attack on Titan (season 1)? Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 13:01, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

@Plastikspork: all of this was much appreciated. I've now fixed the issues for pages like Strike the Blood II, Strike the Blood III and have enabled the list of episodes link to show for pages like Attack on Titan (season 1). Let me know if you see anything else that isn't working. --Gonnym (talk) 13:06, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Gonnym, how about articles such as The Crown (season 3), that use |episode_list=The Crown (TV series)#Episodes? -- /Alex/₂₁ 04:36, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Create the redirect and it should work if I'm not mistaken. Gonnym (talk) 07:13, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

The module should support all situations that were/are already in use across a number of articles, and were supported before the module, instead of breaking articles that had a previously functioning link before the module. It's a few lines of code that support even more articles; what's the harm? -- /Alex/₂₁ 10:30, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Every line of code adds complexity to the whole program and makes maintaining it that much harder. Before adding a line of code, it's worth asking if the "fix" is actually fixing an issue that needs fixing or patching a broken scenario which should be fixed at the root. In this case, what you are trying to fix at the module level should actually be fixed at the page level. Anchored links are bad links. They are unhelpful as when the target changes, the links needs to be updated in each and every place. So for example, currently the link you used is The Crown (TV series)#Episodes, but if the series receives a proper list page, each link will have to be changed to List of The Crown episodes (in a larger view, it's also not possible now to find all links to the episodes without going through all incoming links, making updating links in articles that much harder). This is all explained at MOS:REDIR. The season page also works fine now by either removing the parameter (which is the recommended method as that requires never updating the link) or using "List of The Crown episodes". It's even possible, if wanted, to set up a temp tracking category to catch all current hash links and fix those. The patch-fix is just the worst possible solution here. --Gonnym (talk) 10:41, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

A half dozen lines is not "complex" or hard to maintain. I've ran a search and found 93 articles that use the format that the code supported; plenty enough to warrant the addition, so yes, I've "asked" if the fix is actually fixing the issue.

If the module cannot support cases that were already supported by the wikicode, then I disagree with the move to module-code and oppose it; the template should be reverted to its status quo and a better agreement found. If an agreement cannot be made, then I shall do this presently. Updates should only ever add support, not deliberately break articles that were previously supported. -- /Alex/₂₁ 10:45, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Alex, you are free to do whatever you wish. You asked for a solution, I gave you one. If you don't like it, you are more then welcome to revert it to the template code and handle it yourself. No idea why you are making such a fuss over 93 articles that can easily be fixed with AWB in a matter of minutes. --Gonnym (talk) 11:01, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

I asked for a solution and I found one myself. I have no idea why you're making a fuss over a half-dozen lines of code that automatically fix those 93 articles in a second. Your argument of complexity has no basis; if my half-dozen lines of code make articles too hard to maintain and too complex to run, then your 50-odd for the getListOfEpisodes absolutely do. Are other editors not allowed to contribute to your module? -- /Alex/₂₁ 11:06, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

You are comparing two completely different things. The lines of code I've added are necessary for the feature requested to actually work. Yours add no value as the feature already works and it works for The Crown (season 3). As I pointed above, what you are trying to fix should fix at the template level. For what it's worth, I would have even changed the anchor link anyways if I came across it, regardless if the module feature was implemented or not. --Gonnym (talk) 11:11, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

My code works for 93 articles, not just one. Your lines of code aren't required for it to work; it already worked beforehand via wikicode. They just added extra functionality. Exactly as my lines of code have, they add extra functionality for even more articles. There is zero valid reason not to include it if it fixes articles, and they are two completely identical things to compare. -- /Alex/₂₁ 11:15, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

As I said Alex, feel free to return to your template implementation before I wasted my time to answer your help request. You have an ugly habit of discussion fighting for no apparent reason. If aren't willing to read MOS:REDIR and understand why those 93 links are bad, then there is nothing more for me to engage here. I'm officially done with this discussion. --Gonnym (talk) 11:18, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

MOS:RDR states nothing about how redirects are not allowed. Absolutely nothing.

You have an ugly habit of discussion fighting for no apparent reason. And there was zero reason to revert the module code, other than your desire to edit-war because you just don't want people touching your module. If you're done with this discussion, then there was clearly no reason to revert, because you refuse to discuss it. I'll reinstate the valid module code presently. -- /Alex/₂₁ 11:21, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Lowercase "chronology"?

Is there a reason that the "chronology" label is displayed in lowercase? Shouldn't the first letter be capitalized, like the other labels? — Goszei (talk) 22:13, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

It normally isn't, as it takes either "Season" or "Series" notion to make the label "Season/Series chronology". A lot of that is handled behind the scenes of the template, so it's hard to generate it for the example instance. But if you look at any use of the template in the mainspace, it should appear correctly. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:28, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Favre1fan93: Hmm, I came here because I had spotted the problem in the mainspace. It seems to be fixed now with Alex's change, though. — Goszei (talk) 01:43, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

I've added a default, so that there's no confusion or "odd" cases in the mainspace. -- /Alex/₂₁ 00:58, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

@Alex 21: See Template:Infobox_television_season/testcases; it seems like the change was incomplete. — Goszei (talk) 01:41, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Goszei, that's just the sandbox testcases. I directly updated the parent module. -- /Alex/₂₁ 01:43, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

@Alex 21: Oh, I see now. Your change fixed where I had seen the problem in the mainspace, so all is well. Thanks. — Goszei (talk) 01:46, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

No worries! Just out of curiousity, what article in the mainspace had the issue? -- /Alex/₂₁ 01:47, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

@Alex 21: At One Piece (season 1), and at the subsequent seasons as well. I also saw the problem when I checked at My Hero Academia (season 1). It also appeared in the template doc at Template:Infobox_television_season#Example. I imagine the problem is due to the lack of the "season_number" parameter? — Goszei (talk) 01:55, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Series vs. season

Whoever changed series to season on all the relevant articles needs to change it back because it is wrong. MSalmon (talk) 10:49, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

What articles are you talking about? 7,250 articles use this infobox. Courld you narrow it down a bit? --AussieLegend (✉) 13:55, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, can you be more specific? Also, please note that the parameters |season_number= and |series_number= help determine what terminology is used in the infobox. So it's quite possible the articles you are talking about have the incorrect parameter. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:33, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm going to assume that they are talking about this edit of theirs, which was a result of fixing this automated edit from last year. -- /Alex/₂₁ 00:26, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Series chronology section change

Hello, I have just made a change on Template:Infobox television season/sandbox where the Previous and Next sections can now be hidden if the value of N/A is given to any of the 4 parameters. This is because I noticed on some articles they will appear as Module:Infobox television season name would pick up the years of the articles but this is pointless if it is the first and last season and should be able to hide these not just display N/A. I also fixed an error where the If empty template for the Next section was not properly implemented. Does anyone object to me requesing a template edit for this change? Thanks Terasail^[Talk] 09:11, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

• The template already does that without needing a parameter. See Arrow (season 1). Can you point to the article that is not working like this? --Gonnym (talk) 09:57, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

@Gonnym: On this article: The Seven Deadly Sins (2014 TV series) if you set |prev_season= from |prev_season=N/A it will then list Previous as Series 2013. Terasail^[Talk] 10:09, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

It seems the article is using conflicting terminology. The title says it is a "TV series" while the categories say it's a season. If the article is a season, it should be titled per WP:NCTV as seasons do. If it is TV series, it should use the correct infobox and remove the season categories. The above issue should be resolved when one or the other happens. --Gonnym (talk) 10:19, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Should the website parameter be removed?

The |website= parameter was removed over at Template talk:Infobox television#Website parameters. Should this parameter be also removed from this template to be consistent with the other 2 television infoboxes? Gonnym (talk) 06:10, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes - for the same reasons as it was removed from the others, and for the sake of consistency. ButlerBlog (talk) 12:21, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 12:33, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Yup. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:25, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Now removed. Gonnym (talk) 13:40, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

No. of episodes

See discussion. Jenny Jankel (talk) 19:30, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Template usage

Now that Category:Pages using infobox television with unnecessary name parameter has been essentially cleared out, I started looking at Category:Pages using infobox television season with the season name parameter. There are a significant number of list articles in this particular maintenance category, and that opens up a two-fold question: First, should the "season" infobox be used on a list article? It seems to me that the list article isn't necessarily an article for the season, so it would appear to be a misuse. Most (a lot?) seem to be anime series where there isn't a "season" per se, so the parent article for the show uses {{Infobox television}} and they're using {{Infobox television season}} for the episode list article. But as far as I can see, there is nothing explicitly stated in the template docs or in MOS:TV that says don't use an infobox on a list article. Second, and this depends on the answer to the first question, if the television season infobox can be used on a list article, then we need to look at how the maintenance category is populated and consider excluding these lists because the basename for the article is "list of something" instead of "something" which is why the "season_name" parameter is being used. Hope all that makes sense. I can try to clarify if necessary. ButlerBlog (talk) 20:22, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't see and reply to this for a full year(!!!). To answer your questions here for future reference:

• No. No infobox should be used on a list article. However, not all articles that have the title "List of xxx episodes" are actually a list article. Our friends over at the anime side of the project just hate creating correctly titled articles. No point in wasting your time there.
• Regarding what infobox to use on an anime article, well again, that actually depends on what hides under the incorrect title - is it a season or a series? Here also I'd argue not to waste your time on those articles.

Gonnym (talk) 14:18, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

No problem on the late reply - I kind of forgot about it as well ;-) I do see now what you're saying about incorrectly titled articles - it all makes a lot more sense in light of that. ButlerBlog (talk) 13:24, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Where is DISPLAYTITLE getting generated?

Where in this template, or an upstream template, is the DISPLAYTITLE magic word getting added? With the new change to the styling of season article titles, there are going to be a lot of calls to DISPLAYTITLE on the articles themselves, outside of the template—which will mean a lot of error messages. —C.Fred (talk) 13:07, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

2 sections above you. Gonnym (talk) 13:57, 30 March 2024 (UTC)