Talk:30 Rock

RfC: Is it misleading to say that 30 Rock was critically acclaimed "throughout its run"?
This request for comments is concerning the claim in the lead section that 30 Rock garnered acclaim from critics throughout its run. AndrewOne (talk) 05:55, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Votes

 * Yes. AndrewOne (talk) 05:55, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * No. As per above: to use the phrase in the lede, it's sufficient to have citations for 4 of 7 seasons, unless there's evidence one season was "panned by critics" or the like. Power~enwiki (talk) 19:44, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * You have merely reiterated a statement from an earlier comment, without actually explaining what makes the phrasing acceptable. Please do so in "Discussion". AndrewOne (talk) 12:46, 10 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Support for "throughout much of its run" as it appears to be a little more accurate and fully supported by the refs. Jschnur (talk) 03:15, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * No. Per Power~enwiki's explanation and my previous comments. The page should stay as it has been for years. Anonymous5454 03:12, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes. I think that the meaning of "critically acclaimed 'throughout its run'" is closer to AndrewOne's definition than to Power~enwiki's definition. For a show to be critically acclaimed "throughout its run" it needs to be critically acclaimed for more than the mere majority of its seasons. Perhaps rather than using this phrase, find a way of rewriting to provide more details of which seasons are critically acclaimed? Cjhard (talk) 14:05, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * No - it is not misleading to say that 30 Rock was critically acclaimed "throughout its run" - when reliable sources have used that description (critically acclaimed) throughout it's run on television: the show has enjoyed wide critical acclaim (2007) - unstinting critical acclaim (2008) - critically acclaimed on both sides of the Atlantic (2009) - critically-acclaimed comedy 30 Rock (2010) - critically acclaimed show (2011) - critically acclaimed (2012) - critically-acclaimed show (2013) - 30 Rock ended a critically acclaimed rookie season in 2007 - (January 26, 2017). Isaidnoway (talk)  22:20, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I think this really kills any opposition to the phrasing. The sheer number of sources now supporting it is overwhelming. Anonymous5454 04:42, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * @Anonymous5454: In actuality, none of the sources support it. 30 Rock ran from 2006 to 2013. Sources one, two, and three are from 2007, 2008, and 2009, respectively, and thus they couldn't possibly prove the statement. Sources four, five, and seven simply state that the show is critically acclaimed, without further specification. Source six, which is the same way, seems to be on a website of questionable reliability. Source eight is simply talking about the second season and not the entire show. There are also, as I have explained before, multiple seasons that did not meet the threshold for acclaim on Metacritic. It has been proven before that the show was not acclaimed throughout its entire run. AndrewOne (talk) 22:37, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Discussion
My arguments can be seen in the above talk page section "'critical acclaim throughout its run'". I posted three comments there, the last of which is to my mind the most pertinent. Several seasons of 30 Rock simply haven't been proven acclaimed by the sources cited in the reception-centered section of the article, and would not be reported by review aggregators such as Rotten Tomatoes as having been acclaimed. Therefore, the phrase is puffery. AndrewOne (talk) 05:55, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on 30 Rock. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20080402063934/http://www.nbc.com/30_Rock/video/index.shtml to http://www.nbc.com/30_Rock/video/index.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091001023916/http://www.nbc.com/30_Rock/video/ to http://www.nbc.com/30_Rock/video/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930154554/http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_10573.asp to http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman/publish/article_10573.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080401235219/http://www.nbc.com/30_Rock/video/ to http://www.nbc.com/30_Rock/video/
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5PqITXHEj?url=http://www.avclub.com/content/node/54729 to http://www.avclub.com/content/node/54729
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090930230651/http://www.nbc.com/30_Rock/ to http://www.nbc.com/30_Rock/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:12, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

"Sheinhardt Wig Company" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sheinhardt_Wig_Company&redirect=no Sheinhardt Wig Company] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. TartarTorte 15:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)