So it's pretty much been a year now since there was last any info about Shingeki no Bahamut: Manaria Friends which got postponed indefinitely.
Should we set it to To Be Determined, leave it as it is, or delete it?
gazza911 wrote:
So it's pretty much been a year now since there was last any info about Shingeki no Bahamut: Manaria Friends which got postponed indefinitely.
Should we set it to To Be Determined, leave it as it is, or delete it?
I think it is safe to say that this anime is not happening , I will delete it :)
JuanArango wrote:
Thx for the useful insight, so guys what do we make of it, let it stay or remove it?
Creating an imaginary series? No thanks guys, but so far both are separated one-off's and are not allowed according our policy.
Thomas wrote:
Creating an imaginary series? No thanks guys, but so far both are separated one-off's and are not allowed according our policy.
I agree, unless they share the same cast/crew and plot, but let us wait till they have aired.
http://www.history.com/specials/roanoke-a-mystery-carved-in-stone/about
For centuries, the disappearance of 117 colonists from Roanoke Island has been this country’s oldest mystery. Now, stonework experts Jim and Bill Vieira will use cutting-edge technology to take a deeper look at a mysterious inscription, which could finally lead to the truth about the lost colony.
http://www.history.com/specials/return-to-roanoke-search-for-the-seven/about
Stonework experts Jim and Bill Vieira continue their hunt for the Lost Colony of Roanoke by analyzing the inscription on the mysterious Dare Stone against the 400-year-old historical record. By lining up passages on the stone with clues left behind by Captain John Smith of Jamestown, the Vieiras set out on a search for evidence that could reveal the location of the Lost Colony, and change American history.
--
Two shows in a series or two specials on the same topic (on the same network with the same stars) ... 6 of 1, half a dozen of the other. Rules, IMHO, need to be flexible enough to handle oddities or situations that refuse to fit into neat little categories. Personally, I'd always err on the side of adding more to the database rather than leaving material out. YMMV.
SilverSurfer wrote:
http://www.history.com/specials/roanoke-a-mystery-carved-in-stone/about
For centuries, the disappearance of 117 colonists from Roanoke Island has been this country’s oldest mystery. Now, stonework experts Jim and Bill Vieira will use cutting-edge technology to take a deeper look at a mysterious inscription, which could finally lead to the truth about the lost colony.
http://www.history.com/specials/return-to-roanoke-search-for-the-seven/about
Stonework experts Jim and Bill Vieira continue their hunt for the Lost Colony of Roanoke by analyzing the inscription on the mysterious Dare Stone against the 400-year-old historical record. By lining up passages on the stone with clues left behind by Captain John Smith of Jamestown, the Vieiras set out on a search for evidence that could reveal the location of the Lost Colony, and change American history.
--
Two shows in a series or two specials on the same topic (on the same network with the same stars) ... 6 of 1, half a dozen of the other. Rules, IMHO, need to be flexible enough to handle oddities or situations that refuse to fit into neat little categories. Personally, I'd always err on the side of adding more to the database rather than leaving material out. YMMV.
From those summaries this looks like a two-parter to me and should be added here.
SilverSurfer wrote:
http://www.history.com/specials/roanoke-a-mystery-carved-in-stone/about
For centuries, the disappearance of 117 colonists from Roanoke Island has been this country’s oldest mystery. Now, stonework experts Jim and Bill Vieira will use cutting-edge technology to take a deeper look at a mysterious inscription, which could finally lead to the truth about the lost colony.
http://www.history.com/specials/return-to-roanoke-search-for-the-seven/about
Stonework experts Jim and Bill Vieira continue their hunt for the Lost Colony of Roanoke by analyzing the inscription on the mysterious Dare Stone against the 400-year-old historical record. By lining up passages on the stone with clues left behind by Captain John Smith of Jamestown, the Vieiras set out on a search for evidence that could reveal the location of the Lost Colony, and change American history.
--
Two shows in a series or two specials on the same topic (on the same network with the same stars) ... 6 of 1, half a dozen of the other. Rules, IMHO, need to be flexible enough to handle oddities or situations that refuse to fit into neat little categories. Personally, I'd always err on the side of adding more to the database rather than leaving material out. YMMV.
There's a reason why History decided to split them into two different shows. We can't just create a series for the sake of having more in database. Consistency should be there and no exception for some shows, while others have been rejected previously.
Thomas wrote:
There's a reason why History decided to split them into two different shows. We can't just create a series for the sake of having more in database. Consistency should be there and no exception for some shows, while others have been rejected previously.
But specials that have one common plot have to be tied to a series according to our policy.
JuanArango wrote:
But specials that have one common plot have to be tied to a series according to our policy.
I'm with Thomas on this.
For example, over the time History Channel produced or commissioned a number of documentaries about different aspects of Nazi regime. Two of them on the air today, one after another. Those specials have a common plot (they all about Nazis), shared couple of the same executive producers, maybe even more common crew. So what, we should combine them into series as well, despite that History Channel didn't?
tnt wrote:
I'm with Thomas on this.
For example, over the time History Channel produced or commissioned a number of documentaries about different aspects of Nazi regime. Two of them on the air today, one after another. Those specials have a common plot (they all about Nazis), shared couple of the same executive producers, maybe even more common crew. So what, we should combine them into series as well, despite that History Channel didn't?
you've got a point :)
tnt wrote:
I'm with Thomas on this.
For example, over the time History Channel produced or commissioned a number of documentaries about different aspects of Nazi regime. Two of them on the air today, one after another. Those specials have a common plot (they all about Nazis), shared couple of the same executive producers, maybe even more common crew. So what, we should combine them into series as well, despite that History Channel didn't?
Not quite Apples v Apples. Nazis is a very big topic that can be covered from many different angles while todays shows are pretty narrow in scope ... the Roanoke colony and a particular stone as presented by the same 2 experts.
And, yes, I would combine stand alone Nazi specials on the same channel into a series called "History Nazi Specials" since, as I said IMHO it's better err on that side of inclusion rather than exclusion ... just like Shark Week on Discovery is nothing but a bunch of specials that have Sharks as a theme is a series just because Discover called it such. As always, YMMV
SilverSurfer wrote:
just like Shark Week on Discovery is nothing but a bunch of specials that have Sharks as a theme is a series just because Discover called it such. As always, YMMV
As I've said before, should History at least once mentioned those specials as series – we wouldn't have any second thoughts. If the channel released them as standalone films, with separate web pages and no formal connection – it's not a series. We shouldn't "invent" a series out of thin air just for the sake of "filling the db", whatever similarities exist between those specials. That's my POV.
tnt wrote:
As I've said before, should History at least once mentioned those specials as series – we wouldn't have any second thoughts. If the channel released them as standalone films, with separate web pages and no formal connection – it's not a series. We shouldn't "invent" a series out of thin air just for the sake of "filling the db", whatever similarities exist between those specials. That's my POV.
Perhaps the discussion should be moved to another thread but, one last thought from me before I move on ...
http://www.tvmaze.com/faq/20/about states:
We all aspire for TVmaze to become the leader in tv and network information. A place where everyone can find the info they are looking for, where contributors have fun adding information and get some fulfillment out of it. For like-minded people to find each other and talk about the shows they like.
My TV experiences includes movies of the week, specials and other odds 'n sods that aren't allowed here. Perhaps at the next SysGods meeting some discussion about amending the rules on what can be added can take place or a clearer mission statement that makes it clear TVmaze is for "... tv and network series information" is put forth. Txs for listening & replying everyone and, as always, YMMV.
For some reason "Tyler Perry's If Loving You is Wrong" is all messed up. It goes from S05E01-E11 then to S06E12-E17. Instead of S05E01-E17. I know it's one of those shows that has different season/episode numbers on many sites, but not like that. According to OWN they are still on season 2. They have the one that aired on 3/21/17 titled "A Neighborhood in Crisis" listed as S02E212.
http://www.oprah.com/app/if-loving-you-is-wrong-full-episodes.html
http://www.tvmaze.com/shows/3491/tyler-perrys-if-loving-you-is-wrong/episodes
XoLindsayoX wrote:
For some reason "Tyler Perry's If Loving You is Wrong" is all messed up. It goes from S05E01-E11 then to S06E12-E17. Instead of S05E01-E17. I know it's one of those shows that has different season/episode numbers on many sites, but not like that. According to OWN they are still on season 2. They have the one that aired on 3/21/17 titled "A Neighborhood in Crisis" listed as S02E212.
http://www.oprah.com/app/if-loving-you-is-wrong-full-episodes.html
http://www.tvmaze.com/shows/3491/tyler-perrys-if-loving-you-is-wrong/episodes
I fixed those 6 episodes and as you said almost everyone has listed that show differently, so it would be nice if someone who is very familiar with that show can shed some light on it :)
I suspect that the title of The Blacklist season 2 episode 16 may need to be corrected. All of the episode titles since season 2 episode 10 have been palindromes. This should make the title of episode 16 "Evil Did I Dwell, Lewd I Did Live". In short, the second occurrence of "Did I" in the title should be reversed to "I Did".
GeorgeFergus wrote:
I suspect that the title of The Blacklist season 2 episode 16 may need to be corrected. All of the episode titles since season 2 episode 10 have been palindromes. This should make the title of episode 16 "Evil Did I Dwell, Lewd I Did Live". In short, the second occurrence of "Did I" in the title should be reversed to "I Did".
I suspect you really meant to say "Blindspot".
And yes, that is the correct eptitle according to the official site: http://www.nbc.com/blindspot/episodes
Someone higher up the food chain needs to edit it though, as it is locked due to someone not getting the title pattern.
Can someone correct the spelling of this person's last name please?
It currently shows as - Danielle Monet - http://www.tvmaze.com/people/87018/danielle-monet - It is missing the letter "i"
________________________________________________________________________________
Correct spelling is this - Danielle Moinet - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summer_Rae
Thank you very much, Ron.
JAGUARDOG wrote:
Can someone correct the spelling of this person's last name please?
It currently shows as - Danielle Monet - http://www.tvmaze.com/people/87018/danielle-monet - It is missing the letter "i"
________________________________________________________________________________
Correct spelling is this - Danielle Moinet - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summer_Rae
Thank you very much, Ron.
Fixed.
momijigari wrote:
I suspect you really meant to say "Blindspot".
And yes, that is the correct eptitle according to the official site: http://www.nbc.com/blindspot/episodes
Someone higher up the food chain needs to edit it though, as it is locked due to someone not getting the title pattern.
Done :)