While I appreciate all the hard work that you guys do in listing these shows... My OCD won't let this one lie.
Episode 1 was a long one (containing 2 parts) but is still ONE episode. Click on the dropdown to season 3 on the official site and you'll see what I mean.
https://tv.apple.com/th/show/shrinking/umc.cmc.apzybj6eqf6pzccd97kev7bs
You are listing the current episode as 4 when it is, in fact, Episode 3.
Thanks for listening.
s.
It's already been discussed: https://www.tvmaze.com/threads/2677/edit-requests?page=2031#102001
Thanks for your reply tallanvor. I appreciate you making the effort... But... There wasn't any kind of discussion. Just one person quoting policy, twice, which is quite obviously in need of review. I gave you the link to the official site where it is very clear how the episodes should be numbered.
As I have been 'promoted to TV expert, maybe I could be allowed to do it... just to stop the voices in my head!
Otherwise, just change the name of this site to www.I'm right.com and be done with it.
ps. I'm not being difficult for the sake of it. I love this site... and Telly isn't easy for me as it all has to be done over the internet from a 3rd world country. Then 'MY POLICY" is to convert whatever I get into mp4 because sometime in the early '90's when I got my first Mac... iTunes would only accept mp4's for the listings.
So... I get it. But in this case it's just wrong. Sorry.
Peace.
I don't necessarily disagree with you concerning how streaming shows are considered, but at the same time, sometimes streaming shows end up on linear channels, so keeping things consistent does make sense. This documented here: https://www.tvmaze.com/faq/15/episodes .
I'm afraid the "TV expert" achievement doesn't help you here. The admins set the policy and the head contributors help with that.
Have to say I am with "StephenMason" on this one... even TVDB and IMDB have it listed correctly.
https://thetvdb.com/series/shrinking/seasons/official/3
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15677150/episodes/?season=3&ref_=ttrv_ov_epl_sn
So, if Apple is showing it correctly, and so is TVDB, and so is IMDB, should we not have it correct on this site also so as not to have conflicting information? Kind of hard to be taken seriously as a site if you go about listing show the way a few individuals think they should be listed.
This isn't the only show on this site that is listed differently than the official site lists seasons and episodes. Some are much much worse. It can get rather frustrating.
@Stefan wrote:
Have to say I am with "StephenMason" on this one... even TVDB and IMDB have it listed correctly.https://thetvdb.com/series/shrinking/seasons/official/3
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15677150/episodes/?season=3&ref_=ttrv_ov_epl_sn
So, if Apple is showing it correctly, and so is TVDB, and so is IMDB, should we not have it correct on this site also so as not to have conflicting information? Kind of hard to be taken seriously as a site if you go about listing show the way a few individuals think they should be listed.
This isn't the only show on this site that is listed differently than the official site lists seasons and episodes. Some are much much worse. It can get rather frustrating.
If those two parts have different credits our policy demands to list them as two episodes. Of course that policy could be re-discussed.
maybe this will help you. From your list of considerations in the link to your policy... the first consideration is from press releases/announcements.
This was the first announcement of the show, 11 episodes were announced... not 12.
for your convenience... the relevant text is at the bottom of the FIRST paragraph and reads: “Shrinking” season three will premiere globally with a one-hour premiere episode on Wednesday, January 28, on Apple TV, followed by one new episode weekly, every Wednesday until April 8, 2026.
@StephenManson wrote:
maybe this will help you. From your list of considerations in the link to your policy... the first consideration is from press releases/announcements.This was the first announcement of the show, 11 episodes were announced... not 12.
for your convenience... the relevant text is at the bottom of the FIRST paragraph and reads: “Shrinking” season three will premiere globally with a one-hour premiere episode on Wednesday, January 28, on Apple TV, followed by one new episode weekly, every Wednesday until April 8, 2026.
yes, I understand this :) But our current policy says on screen data trumps press releases. What does the other staff think about re-discussing that part of the policy? @Aidan @gazza911 @TomSouthwell @TonyMayhew @MTQueenie @LadyShelley @RoseRed @NathanDrake83
wow, so much self-importance in one place... almost as bad as a torrent site. Yes, they were much worse... they STEAL the info and still act like they own it. You don't steal it... but you're still starting to act like you created it... which you didn't. You just display it... and organise in your own (whatever) way. You act like you actually have control... you don't. That's decided by the creators.. you know, the ones who have the ORIGINAL ideas.
When you start to believe that you are more important than your suppliers and customers... it's time to re-evaluate your entire business model.
To be honest, I don't see a need to change the policy. We could make an exception, sure, but then what about the next one? And the one after? Then each case has its own logic.
I prefer consistency, we all know very well how easily streamers and networks change their mind. This certainly isn't the first or the only series with episodes numbered differently from the official source, don't even mention other sites. So what? We've never claimed they're wrong or whatever, we just follow a different, consistent logic.
And if someone is not happy with that... eh, what you gonna do, life is hard. :)
@JuanArango wrote:
yes, I understand this :) But our current policy says on screen data trumps press releases. What does the other staff think about re-discussing that part of the policy? @Aidan @gazza911 @TomSouthwell @TonyMayhew @MTQueenie @LadyShelley @RoseRed @NathanDrake83
On-screen data trumps press releases because that's what most people using TVMaze would see.
Most aren't looking through press releases to find information - otherwise they'd be on the press site, not here.
Verbatim order would normally be sufficient for how the data is stored. It's simply unfortunate that everything (watch list, calendar, etc) is based off the main episode list. Without being able to toggle that, people will inevitably be unhappy.
I don't think changing the ordering in the policy would be right. Exceptions should only be if it's deemed that it has no benefit to anyone.
I agree there is no need to change policy. If we do, that is opening a can of worms that is bound to cause more confusion with other shows. On screen credits trumps everything else, which makes sense as that is what most people see.
since this topic does seem contentious it would be interesting to see a more comprehensive article on how a change in policy would effect different shows. Saying something is policy is most likely to be unconvincing to detractors unless the trade offs are more clear. here the trade offs are only alluded to.
@STHayden wrote:
since this topic does seem contentious it would be interesting to see a more comprehensive article on how a change in policy would effect different shows. Saying something is policy is most likely to be unconvincing to detractors unless the trade offs are more clear. here the trade offs are only alluded to.
It is fairly common to air a premiere or pilot episode as a special, two-part episode, but on subsequent airings or on a disk release, combine the episodes into a single movie-length 'episode'. Or they might do the opposite, air the premiere as a movie, and then split the episode down the line. We list the episode as it originally airs. In this case, the episode aired in two parts with clear credit sequences in between.
hello everybodymateypeeps... how are you today? I give u my opinion. This website is what? it is (1) a website that displays tv listings, no? and (2) a community of peeps who like to watch tv and give their opinions on the tv shows, yes? ok... going back to (1) it is not a Hollywood studio... so you don't create anything, right? other than the pretty colors and a bit of patched together software... so you don't really create anything... you just display the things that other people create, right? so if these super-smart peeps who created all these super smart shows... which create (THE ENTIRE) reason for you to make this green website, change their mind sometimes... that makes you their bitch no? it means you have to change it to what they say, no? because they made it... right? so what you say is neither here nor there, no matter how important you think you might have become, by making the most administrative secretarial organisational posts and policies (of someone else's creation) right... I mean, if you want to write to apple and say, "hey apple" we think you suck because you put credits and you should change your programming because we have a policy, made by non-creative administrators who all use made up names and pretend to be important. so please change your program name because it doesn't align with our policies. ok... then I may agree with you. like. never. get a grip and know your place.... that said, this site is 99.9% great, keep up the good work.
@CouchPohtaytoh wrote:
hello everybodymateypeeps... how are you today? I give u my opinion. This website is what? it is (1) a website that displays tv listings, no? and (2) a community of peeps who like to watch tv and give their opinions on the tv shows, yes? ok... going back to (1) it is not a Hollywood studio... so you don't create anything, right? other than the pretty colors and a bit of patched together software... so you don't really create anything... you just display the things that other people create, right? so if these super-smart peeps who created all these super smart shows... which create (THE ENTIRE) reason for you to make this green website, change their mind sometimes... that makes you their bitch no? it means you have to change it to what they say, no? because they made it... right? so what you say is neither here nor there, no matter how important you think you might have become, by making the most administrative secretarial organisational posts and policies (of someone else's creation) right... I mean, if you want to write to apple and say, "hey apple" we think you suck because you put credits and you should change your programming because we have a policy, made by non-creative administrators who all use made up names and pretend to be important. so please change your program name because it doesn't align with our policies. ok... then I may agree with you. like. never. get a grip and know your place.... that said, this site is 99.9% great, keep up the good work.
That's a lot of opinion for someone who just joined last Thursday!
@RoseRed wrote:
That's a lot of opinion for someone who just joined last Thursday!
Thanks for your observation RoseRed, (short and irrelevant to the actual post content as it was - as a HEAD I would expect a bit more maturity) but I wasn't born last Thursday, I didn't start watching TV last Thursday, I just try to stay true to my beliefs... and my opinions are my own. I certainly don't expect everyone to agree with them... isn't that the point of a discussion forum? ... and not to just attack people who don't agree with your point of view. Although, thinking about it, you're actually reinforcing my comment about perceived self-importance by indicating that my short time on this site makes my opinions less.... I'm sure you get my point!
@CouchPohtaytoh wrote:
Thanks for your observation RoseRed, (short and irrelevant to the actual post content as it was - as a HEAD I would expect a bit more maturity) but I wasn't born last Thursday, I didn't start watching TV last Thursday, I just try to stay true to my beliefs... and my opinions are my own. I certainly don't expect everyone to agree with them... isn't that the point of a discussion forum? ... and not to just attack people who don't agree with your point of view. Although, thinking about it, you're actually reinforcing my comment about perceived self-importance by indicating that my short time on this site makes my opinions less.... I'm sure you get my point!
wow, amazing. On a discussion forum full of intelligent, articulate and opinionated members... to receive 9 downvotes without a single constructive comment, rebuttal or alternative point of view on such a polarizing post. What does that indicate? Voting manipulation by someone with admin powers and multiple accounts or a secret clique of mutes. C'mon peeps... this is the quickest way to lose an online community... or at least fill it with trolls! This site is too good for that.
A bit of context with this: this policy was developed in the era before streaming services. On broadcast TV, it frequently happens (happened?) that shows came out with a two-part episode airing back-to-back without an indication whether it was intended to take up 1 or 2 episode numbers. This frequently caused contention and edit wars, so we needed a consistent policy to rely on.
Of course the situation is quite different with streaming services. On broadcast TV, episodes don't come attached with an episode number, but on streaming services they inherently do. I understand the policy doesn't always make sense there. Now, whether considering changing the policy (possibly only for streaming services) is a can of worms worth opening, I will leave to the rest of the staff.
