Talk:Girl Meets World/Archive 2

Mrs. Svorski
I see this edit, which includes the detail of her death in "Girl Meets Gravity", and an earlier edit by IJBall, which leaves this detail out. After thinking about it some, I somewhat agree with IJBall about leaving it out as an "unnecessary spoiler", and I think this is a common sense thing. But what are your thoughts on this sensitive detail being disclosed in her character description? MPFitz1968 (talk) 17:16, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I think the info she died in an episode is out-of-universe info that means she won't be returning to the show. WP:SPOILER basically means spoilers are not a consideration for episode content. Doesn't mean something needs to be in an article if there is no good reason to include it. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:25, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know what WP:SPOILER says (it's not a guideline I totally agree with, but that's neither here nor there), but including this info is an unnecessary spoiler. I can't figure out why it's necessary to put that info on the main article page, instead of reserving that revelation for the episode list page. In any case, I certainly oppose its inclusion here. --IJBall (talk) 17:31, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * As part of the character bio the fact that she died in an episode of the show is important to note. I think it is necessary for this article and should not be hidden in an episode description as it does apply to the character outside of the episode itself. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:33, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Geraldo, I could not disagree more strongly. Please note what WP:SPOILER actually says – it says that readers should have an expectation of being spoiled in sections titled things like "Plot" or "Story". Nowhere does that include Cast lists which is the section where this Spoiler has been placed. There is no compelling rationale that readers be given specific details of a character's storyline in the Cast list, and when a certain recurring actor appears in the series can be handled other ways (e.g. listing the episodes or season they specifically appear in). Again, I think it should be removed from here, and relocated to the separate Episode list. --IJBall (talk) 17:39, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I can't find any restrictions on where spoilers are permitted in that guideline. The key quotes "It is not acceptable to delete information from an article because you think it spoils the plot" and "When including spoilers, editors should make sure that an encyclopedic purpose is being served". Thus this info is like any other info about the character and should be treated as such. For any person, fictional or real the fact that they died is a key piece of bio info. It served an encylopedic purpose to include that info for this character description. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:52, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * So the fact that including that bothers at least a couple of us gives you no pause at all? (Remember WP:Consensus...) Or the fact that it could be rephrased to something like, "...in her final appearance on the show", which would be a much better option, makes no difference? Again, I totally object as this inclusion is an unnecessary spoiler. I am asking that it at least be rephrased. Are you OK with that?... --IJBall (talk) 18:01, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Hard to say what current consensus really is unless all the other editors (3 or 4?) who have been adding the info to the article choose to comment here. Seems to keep being put back in the article by different editors after being removed so there does appear to be some strong support to keep it. One version stated: "An elderly lady that ran Svorski's, a local bakery, eventually giving ownership to Topanga. She later dies in "Girl Meets Gravity." Straight factual info. I do object to removing the fact that she dies, though. Don't care how that info is phrased. I disagree that this is an "unnecessary spoiler". It is important factual info that belongs in any character description for characters who die in any show. Character articles all include that info when appropriate. A character entry in a list should as well. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:34, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * One more thing – I think I might agree with your point, if we were talking about a main (cast) character. But, in the case of a recurring character, I think including plot details like this qualifies as "over-detailed". --IJBall (talk) 18:35, 16 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Perhaps over-detailed but consistent with other recurring characters detail for example "Evelyn Rand" also with key plot points. Inclusion as a recurring character in the first place for a 2 episode character is marginal. Usually recurring means shows up a lot but not regular cast. If including key plot details in character descriptions of other characters including this one, the fact that this one dies in an episode is not inconsistent. It does look like, though, that most of the other character description don't include any plot detail at all and just stick with characterization info. Removing all plot detail from "Evelyn Rand" and "Mrs. Svorski" as "over-detailed" would be consistent with the other characters. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:55, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Obviously, I would not object to that interpretation...  --IJBall (talk) 19:03, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

This attempt at getting agreement appears to be unstable with too many different editors persisting in adding the info back. As stated this is an article consensus issue, not a policy or guideline issue, and consensus appears, by editor behavior, to want the info in the article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:07, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Last Name of Farkle?
changed the hidden comment and added Farkle's last name claiming that it was confirmed in the episode "Girl Meets Maya's Mom". I've seen that episode and it's correct. Stuart Minkus says that Farkle is his son and Lucas says something like "You're Farkle Minkus?" (can't really remember). Even though it was confirmed in this episode his last name never appears during end credits. But I do think it's acceptable to put Farkles' last name as they've already confirmed it.-- Chamith  (talk)  01:52, 4 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I disagree. The intro sentence should be a top level description of the characters from an out-of-universe perspective. This character has an official credit that is explicitly written in the credits of the episodes as shown. His father's last name is given later in the description - that is sufficient. He was referred to once in passing by another character with a last name. Normal common name is just "Farkle" as the credits choose to label him. In general articles about shows should be written with an neutral out-of-universe perspective and supported by references. This is not supposed to be a fan-site. Discovery of names mentioned in passing is trivial details that don't enhance the meaning or understanding of the article or this character. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:10, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree with . What Farkle's last name is doesn't impact anybody's view of him as a character. If that fact ends up being important in later seasons, then it can go back in. For now, it's WP:TRIVIA. Luthien22 (talk) 02:49, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Something I just thought of: If and when Corey Fogelmanis becomes listed in the opening credits (while the theme music is playing at the beginning of the show), his character name (Farkle) will likely not be listed during that segment, as is the case with the other main cast members. Just the actor/actress name, not the character name alongside it. Most TV shows employ this in their openings, though there are plenty of exceptions, too—maybe one or two cast members in a show will stand out, and have their credit listed as "(actor/actress name) as (character name)". I still would leave Farkle's last name out, on the grounds stated in previous comments, in-universe trivia and not listed in the official credits. It is considered in-universe trivia primarily because his last name is not notably stated throughout the show's run so far, unlike Matthews, Hart, or even Lucas' last name Friar (Cory in his class refers to him as Mr. Friar, but refers to Farkle as, Farkle). Despite Farkle's last name being clearly written in a "bumper" for the "Girl Meets Master Plan" episode (as user PeterAKer indicated here), it does not change the notability of his last name in comparison to the aforementioned. (I also notice in the recurring characters list Ava's last name being shown, when in the closing credits it never is; definitely should consider removing her last name in that list, per credits and the comparable lack of notability of the last name in the context of the show.) Now regarding the official credits, I don't know if that will ever be changed to include Farkle's last name, as the opening credits I stated at the beginning of this comment likely will not list the character name. Though there could be that exception, but the character name if stated would have to include the last name to become record here. MPFitz1968 (talk) 17:06, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Is the bumper part of the released episode or part of a network inserted ad? I would consider it equivalent to a "credit" if it is part of the episode (on DVD or streaming release) even if not in one of the general credits locations. What exactly was shown spoken or written? It would not be an in-universe trivial plot reveal and would have the same weight as other official words from the network as the medianet show description used for the main cast official credited names here. If the bumper was part of a removable commercial spot and it not part of the "official" episode, I don't see it as counting as a credit. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:25, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * In the "Girl Meets Master Plan" episode, there were a number of bumpers as Cory, Riley and Topanga were revealing their "master plan" as to how to match Shawn up with Maya's mother. The first few bumpers I saw showed "Cory Matthews: The Fixer"; "Riley Matthews: The Apprentice"; "Topanga Matthews: The Inspiration"; "Farkle Minkus: The Wonk" (he was showing off some watch that he supposedly rigged to play Riley's and Maya's voice on various messages that apparently neither said, thus his label of the "wonk"); and "Lucas Friar: The Face". The gang would be talking about their plan when these bumpers would pop up after describing each person's role in the plan. I know I've seen something like this before on TV, perhaps with old time programs, though I forget which show(s) exactly. But the bumpers were definitely within the episode itself, not in a commercial segment or anything like that. MPFitz1968 (talk) 17:48, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Interesting. Not really equivalent to a "credit" then, it is an in-universe show plot reveal and part of the episode itself. Leaves us back were we were with the other show plot reveals. I was hoping for more that that. It would be nice if Disney gave this info in some official, but out-of-universe, documentation about the show itself as they did for the other starring characters. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:11, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter if his full name isn't listed in the credits. It's said int he show, that makes it canon, period. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.97.250.214 (talk) 04:28, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * It does matter. We don't go by "it's obvious" statements, we go by sources. Amaury (talk) 04:34, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

The show is the source. What happens onscreen is the highest form of canon for a tv show. They say his name, that means it is his name.
 * What is listed in the credits overrides any of that. Credits are also part of the episodes as aired and give official credited names. Names revealed in passing are just in-universe plot trivia. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:00, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * A character's name is anything but trivial. His name is given more than once in show, it's canon.
 * This is an encyclopedia, not a fan site, and should be written to reflect an out of universe perspective on the show. Plot revealed minor trivia such a enhanced names of characters beyond how credited add nothing to the understanding of that character in a character description. We have official names and that is what should be used for credit info. The description already mentions his father's name. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:06, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

See File:Girl Meets World main characters.jpg metadata section for how Disney is crediting the main cast. Info in image description shows this is an official press release image of cast in character from the DisneyABC press site for show. The image was created 8 May 8, 2015 as shown in image metadata which reflects the EXIF data embedded in the image itself. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:11, 4 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Hmm, don't know what to make of this recent article from Zap2it, talking about the upcoming episode "Girl Meets I Am Farkle" (which they show as "Girl Meets Farkle" in the article). It identifies Farkle's last name there. Even with that, I'm still inclined to stick to what the official credits are — with the last name kept out. MPFitz1968 (talk) 16:57, 4 September 2015 (UTC)


 * That is an extract of a Disney Press release. See http://www.disneyabcpress.com/disneychannel/shows/girl-meets-world/press-releases/ titled "Special Episode of "Girl Meets World," Airing (9/11)" released 09/02/15. Since that is from an actual press release from a Disney site that would count as an official out-of-universe credited name. Extract from press release: ""Girl Meets World" stars Rowan Blanchard as Riley Matthews, Ben Savage as Cory Matthews, Sabrina Carpenter as Maya Hart, Peyton Meyer as Lucas Friar, August Maturo as Auggie Matthews, Corey Fogelmanis as Farkle Minkus and Danielle Fishel as Topanga Matthews." Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 October 2015
I want to update the website on girl meets world, as it is far from up to date.

5.151.0.12 (talk) 13:23, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 13:28, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

MOS:TV guideline discourages episode counts for cast members
I looked at updates to the guideline, and under WP:TVCAST, it says this: The cast listing should not contain an episode count, e.g. (# episodes), to indicate the number of episodes in which the actor/character appeared. If an actor misses an episode due to a real world occurrence, such as an injury that prevents them from appearing, this info can be noted in the character's description or "Production" section with a reliable source. I was also checking out the relevant discussion at WT:MOSTV, under the section "Addendum to the Cast section", where consensus is clear on not using these episode counts, and such requires sourcing to verify (in the event of vandalism of these counts). Per the updated MOS:TV guideline, I have removed the table depicting the episode counts of cast members from the article. I also saw in the table that it broke down the seasons each is in, which is unnecessary as all seven main cast members are in the two seasons to date. MPFitz1968 (talk) 09:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 December 2015
Please unprotect it

99.233.155.197 (talk) 20:26, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Padlock-dash2.svg Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. Cannolis (talk) 20:34, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * User has edit-warred on this article which got them blocked back in September, and probably is wanting to make same edits (unexplained reordering of main cast members in the article to fit their liking, against long-established guideline to order the cast members by the order credited in the show, with later additions to the credits added last). I stand behind administrator who semi-protected article, who also happened to block user at that time. MPFitz1968 (talk) 20:40, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * As do I, especially considering they're at it again here. I shall report them. Amaury (talk) 20:48, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Mrs. Svorski II
In the character section it says she gave the bakery to Topanga. In fact, in season one Topanga and Corey became part owners of the bakery to help save it from being taken over during Topanga legal battle with her boss, So Topanga was part owner of the bakery and assumed complete control upon Mrs. Svorski's death. 2601:18D:8402:3AD0:29F8:B8A1:7643:9E70 (talk) 05:52, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Airing on Netflix - trivia or not?
This edit, I reverted because of the reference cited, which is a fan site for Girl Meets World, and is thus unreliable. I had thoughts of finding better sources for this material, as articles are written about what is coming to Netflix, and I do remember GMW premiering there on August 23, 2015. However, I just think of it as trivia, as the series did not have a first-run premiere there; lots of TV shows and movies pop up on Netflix for on-demand streaming, and it is pointless to make mention on every article about a TV show or movie that has aired on Netflix about when it premiered, or how long it was on the streaming service. Likewise with Amazon or any other streaming services, unless the show or movie made its first-run premiere on such. Thoughts? I am also noting where the edit was made is in the Broadcast section, where it lists when it premiered on international outlets (Disney Channel in Australia, UK, etc.) I am on the fence about the encyclopedic nature of that vs. plain trivia, even with sourcing, and not sure where the line should be drawn on these mentions. MPFitz1968 (talk) 17:42, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * We generally don't list syndication outlets for most shows and NETFLIX is similar for non-first-run stuff. If it were notable, which means significant coverage in reliable secondary sources, it could be listed but just a directory listing is not sufficient. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:06, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree, it's unnecessary trivia in this case. To give a counter-example, Violetta saw its first proper U.S. release on Netflix (season 1 had aired on Azteca, a Spanish-language channel before), so I'd consider it notable for that article. nyuszika7h (talk) 21:04, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Why no Netflix broadcast? --Allygggggg (talk) 21:05, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Read the comments above. nyuszika7h (talk) 21:06, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Ratings: Season 2 average viewership, not sure if this is an issue
After going thru the raw viewership data for the episodes in season 2, and compiling it for the average in the Ratings section (2.28 million for the whole season), I am aware that some of the episodes did not premiere on Friday—the first four episodes of the season, which were part of a week-long set of episodes to kick off season 2 back in May 2015, plus parts 2 and 3 of "Girl Meets Texas" in October. Different nights of the week undoubtedly have different audience measures for many reasons, as does certain Friday evenings over others. One episode I recall that did air on a Friday, "Girl Meets Rah Rah" (3.31 million viewers, highest of the season), which aired after the premiere of the movie Invisible Sister, was about an hour or so later than its normal time slot. As the ratings table shows the normal day and time slot for the show, I don't know if the average may be skewed a bit due to the above episodes airing outside that normal day and time. I won't worry about it too much, just something to pass along after noting what is in the ratings table. MPFitz1968 (talk) 18:21, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Character Split
I feel like the character list is long enough to warrant its own article. I will perform a split by the end of next week if there are no objections. Amaury (talk) 04:29, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * This has been done. Amaury (talk) 00:01, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Girl Meets World won an award
Just thought I'd let everyone know that Girl Meets World did win an award this year. They won for Children's Pilot and Series (Live Action) at the 2016 Artios Awards. I think it's worth a mention on the main Wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riarklematthews (talk • contribs) 07:10, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done – nyuszika7h (talk) 10:01, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Switch to single-camera filming format?
After watching "Girl Meets High School: Part One", it's clear to me that the show switched from the multi-camera format it used in seasons 1–2 to a "single-camera" format (a la Stuck in the Middle) for shooting season 3. Has this been mentioned in any WP:RS anywhere?

If so, I suggest it be added to to the article – it's pretty unusual for a show to switch filming formats in the middle of its run like this. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:36, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I wonder if the switch is permanent or just for those season pilot episodes. More time to do those episodes so single camera can be tolerated but it slows things down for the benefits gained for regular 8-day (in general) episode production schedules. If they do plan on making the change to give the show a more polished look, I'd expect they'd be proud of that and would expect some of that info to show up in a reliable source somewhere and if we can reference it should be in article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:00, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * This Forbes piece certainly confirms that it was multi-cam. But I can find nothing about the switch to single camera. I can't even find a Disney Press release about the season 3 premiere... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:09, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Nominated for Kids Choice Awards 2016 Mexico
Girl Meets World was nominated for the Mexico Kids Choice Awards 2016. Category is Favorite International Program. Link is here http://kidschoiceawardsmexico.mundonick.com/votar#cat=programa_internacional_mx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riarklematthews (talk • contribs) 20:57, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

GMW Nominated for 2016 Emmy Award
Girl Meets World was nominated for the second time in a row for Outstanding Children's Program for the 2016 Emmy Awards, according to the Emmy Awards site. Itstmims (talk) 17:23, 14 July 2016 (UTC)itstmims
 * ✅ by Riarklematthews. Altamel (talk) 16:56, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Awards and nominations section - actor awards being moved to their individual pages, what about writers, directors, etc.?
In light of the discussion at K.C. Undercover, the decision was to move any award or nomination for an actor/actress to his/her individual Wikipedia article instead of keeping it in the article for the show for which he/she received the award or nomination. (In that case, Zendaya was the only one with awards/nominations listed in that section at K.C. Undercover.)

In this article, however, we have another related issue with the awards and nominations listing, where individuals are the recipients of the accolades rather than the show itself—writers in this case. I'm neutral as to whether they, or directors, producers, costume designers, etc., should stay on the list or be moved to their individual articles. Looking up the two listed writers (Matthew Nelson and Mark Blutman) on Wikipedia, though, indicates neither has an article, so I'm thinking the status quo for how this section is presented right now, but what about in general, should any have Wikipedia articles? Again, I have no opinion regarding these individuals staying on the list or being moved to their articles, but it is a good question considering actors/actresses are being moved. MPFitz1968 (talk) 15:13, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Those are specifically for an episode of the show written/directed by them, so I think they can stay. nyuszika7h (talk) 15:16, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * If the award is specifically for writing, directing or acting in an episode(s) of this series, then it basically is an award for both the series and the person. Like Academy awards for acting count for both movie and the person when the award count for a movie is listed. Also Emmy awards are for best performance in a specific series should be listed for both. If the award is a popularity award as such as favorite/best whatever of the year actor with no specific performance connection, that should be for the person only. Awards for the show in general don't belong on an actor page. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:55, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll need something cleared up. A recent edit I made here removed two Teen Choice Awards nominations for Choice Summer TV Actor (Peyton Meyer) and Choice Summer TV Actress (Rowan Blanchard), because I was under the impression that it is for the actor/actress only and not the show, and the category names indicate that. I still think that, but the source of the info  clearly identifies the show in the listing for both categories. So is the removal from the awards and nominations listing here still the correct move? On the part about awards for the show in general not belonging on the actor page, I'm in full agreement there, and recently removed Girl Meets World awards and nominations that were for the show from Rowan Blanchard's page . MPFitz1968 (talk) 17:27, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * If the actual nomination text itself mentions both the person and the show, the award belongs in both articles. If the name of this show is mentioned in the award, then it is a award for this show and should be in this article. It would be best to get the primary source from the actual award in case the secondary source is making assumptions but in the reference given looks like a correct report. Of course those sources should be in the article to show WP:SCOPE inclusion. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:41, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 August 2016
Season 3 already premiered. 24.135.242.57 (talk) 02:15, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * ❌. It's not clear what you're asking. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 02:22, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

"Spin-off" or "sequel" to Boy Meets World?
An edit at Boy Meets World had me scratching my head about whether calling Girl Meets World a "spin-off" or a "sequel" to that show is more accurate. In looking up the definitions of the terms, either seems to fit, and looking thru several inline citations in this article indicates sources use either. I reverted the edit at BMW anyway, as it seems unnecessary to flip-flop between the two if one use is established. MPFitz1968 (talk) 05:23, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Spin-off is more appropriate, in my opinion, just like how Bunk'd is a spin-off of Jessie. A sequel typically involves all the same cast. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 05:26, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Sarah Carpenter
I have previewed the latest episode of Girl Meets World on Watch Disney ("Girl Meets Her Monster") (spoiler alert!) and Sarah Carpenter, Sabrina's sister, has guest star billing for the first time in this episode. She has portrayed classmate Sarah for pretty much the show's entire run, in numerous episodes but always a co-star, although for very early episodes, she may have been credited as "Student #X". There's going to be the temptation to list her, either in this article or the LoC article, as recurring following this episode, and at the moment, I'm not sure which way I'd lean with this inclusion. This is far different from Timmy in Bunk'd (Nate Stone), where he appeared in only four episodes, getting no credit in two of them, a co-star credit in the third, and a guest star credit in the fourth ("Camp Kiki-Slasher"). Sarah Carpenter has been in way more than four episodes, though I don't know exactly how many ... I'm estimating the tally to be somewhere between the high teens and two dozen. Episodes where she has at least one spoken line may be a bit closer to a dozen or slightly less. Thoughts? MPFitz1968 (talk) 15:20, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
 * She was basically a background character from your description up until the recent episode which is the first one she got a significant role (or her agent got her a promotion). I'd suggest waiting for more guest starring roles before declaring her recurring. I'd be OK with at least one more guest star role given the number of times showed up as co-starring. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:38, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Have added Sarah to the recurring characters section at List of Girl Meets World characters after another guest star billing in "Girl Meets Hollyworld". MPFitz1968 (talk) 08:54, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

2017 WGA Award
Girl Meets World has been nominated for a 2017 Writers Guild of America (WGA) Award, for the episode "Girl Meets Commonism", written by Joshua Jacobs & Michael Jacobs. http://awards.wga.org/wga-awards/nominees-winners24.35.162.197 (talk) 04:15, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Updated categories
SInce they have moved on academically, time to add the category of High school television series.--2601:5C0:4200:6EFE:1B4:A530:8582:FE69 (talk) 03:33, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Not needed. First of all, I am not sure that the category police will let there be the two similar categories. But more importantly, it is not a high school school show. It is a show that happened to be on long enough to have a natural life change. For example: Friends. If you were asked to describe it, it would be about "six single 20-somethings living in New York". Sure, by the end of the show, they were all in their 40's, married, and had kids - but you wouldn't describe it that way. Kellymoat (talk) 10:29, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked editor now, so I don't think their comment really has any merit, but speaking generally, we do have the middle school category there, so I wouldn't see anything wrong with including the high school category. I have no strong opinions either way, however. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 18:59, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't see it as being WP:DEFINING for this show. School is just a setting that kids have to attend, like adults have a job – not the focus. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:06, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Good point. So then, should the middle school category be removed? Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 19:08, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't have added it and I don't see how that is defining for this show based on the description in the lead and how most sources I've seen describe the show. I think middle school is a proxy being used for the age of the characters. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:19, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I removed that and another one due to not being WP:DEFINING, though there may be others that need to be removed if you and the others don't consider them defining. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 19:32, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Category:English-language television programming is one of the standard general classification categories that most English language television programs get put in. Basically because that is what this show is and described somewhat that way by the combination of the intro sentence and infobox. The WP:OR genre type categories are the most concerning for defining. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:26, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

If you highlighted the show as Middle school television series, you already have set the precedent of the program defined by Its academic setting so since THEY HAVE moved on, the upgrade IS warranted.--2601:5C0:4200:6EFE:5CD7:1350:2035:755 (talk) 16:29, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
 * No, because it's not WP:DEFINING. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 16:35, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Glee is highlighted as a college television series when very little of it focused on college. Not nearly as much as it did on high school.--2601:5C0:4200:6EFE:5CD7:1350:2035:755 (talk) 16:55, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
 * A lot of articles should have categories pruned. Very little checking is normally done when categories are added as most editors ignore category additions unless blatantly wrong. One of the reasons we don't generally use other articles as precedents to do other than what the manual of style recommends. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:31, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

The lion's share of the episodes are spent in the school setting, so naturally since they have moved onto high school, it should not be a matter of debate to add High school television series to this show's categories.--68.192.236.182 (talk) 20:46, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Much better source for GMW cancellation.
Disney Channel PR has both tweeted and posted an Instagram photo stating that GMW is cancelled. https://twitter.com/DisneyChannelPR/status/816871029901406208 That's about as direct as you can get so we should probably use those as the source.24.35.162.197 (talk) 05:03, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Girl Meets World. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thewrap.com/girl-meets-world-renewed-for-season-3-on-disney-channel-exclusive/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141213185034/http://www.mynewsroom.co.za/disney-channel-programming-highlights-november-2014/ to http://www.mynewsroom.co.za/disney-channel-programming-highlights-november-2014/

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) 08:07, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Campaign section
I think there should be a section in the article for saving Girl Meets world on the petitions, and fans trying to save the show. Here are some links to get started https://www.yahoo.com/tv/girl-meets-world-boss-talks-212322157.html http://www.seventeen.com/celebrity/movies-tv/news/a44333/girl-meets-world-fans-think-netflix-is-the-last-hope-to-save-the-show/ There are hundred of campaigns going around twitter and other social media sites as well video calls from Netflix and more on youtube. I think there should be some type of section about this. 2602:306:3130:C980:A450:A294:21FD:D16A (talk) 22:13, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * This is currently being addressed as more articles pop up. SatDis (talk) 06:48, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Talks of continuing...
I feel like this should be at least mentioned somewhere in the article. Via TV Line, Michael Jacobs has confirmed that there are talks underway at the very early stages of possibly continuing the show elsewhere. http://tvline.com/2017/01/12/girl-meets-world-season-4-revival-chances-michael-jacobs-interview/ 24.35.162.197 (talk) 21:54, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * This has been addressed and will continue to be as more sources pop up. SatDis (talk) 06:50, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Revisiting awards/nominations that belong in that section
Two particular categories from the 2016 Teen Choice Awards re-added to the article (now twice in the last week or so) by are getting my attention : specifically Choice Summer TV Actor and Choice Summer TV Actress. A couple of points here:
 * These categories name a group of actors or actresses, and from what the category name indicates, is not directly related to the show.
 * However, in the source cited for both, it does name the series in the listing, so going by the source, it seems OK to add these two categories to the article's list of awards/nominations.

IMO, the latter's reasoning is clear enough to have these two categories added. With the former, though, we're disregarding what is in the source and making our own evaluation about what a category is, thus making it original research. I'm also reminded that just because a source says something doesn't necessarily warrant inclusion.

So given what Riarklematthews has added (at least twice), do we let it stand? MPFitz1968 (talk) 18:22, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * We should go with what the award itself says. These popularity awards are for the people themselves whose major work was on the show but still the award is for their body of work, and also includes other social publicity activities as received by the public unrelated to their acting, and is not linked to the show directly. Entertainment sites like to puff up movie and TV award counts with anything that could even marginally be related to the movie or show even if that is not what the award is for. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:39, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, as I've said before, awards like this should go to "actor" pages, not the TV series pages, IMO... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:17, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

I understand where you are coming from with the awards going to the "actor" pages, but I added them because they were nominated FOR Girl Meets World at both Teen Choice and Kids Choice Awards. It specifically mentions the show in each of these categories. The same thing can be said for Ava Kolker's Young Artist Award nomination. They are recognizing her for her role on Girl Meets World. A lot of TV Show Wikipedia pages include these nominations. Look at Pretty Little Liars, Grey's Anatomy, etc. I think Peyton should be recognized for his TCA nomination, and Rowan for her TCA and KCA nom. Riarklematthews (talk) 01:28, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Netflix reportedly not going to save the show - how reliable is TheWrap?
I am making this note ahead of anyone placing this in the article regarding Netflix's possibly not reviving the show (TheWrap article here). I'm in doubt about this as official word of Netflix being out of the running (and a number of other sources I'm seeing on the Internet, including Yahoo and Seventeen magazine, are using this article as their primary reference), so it doesn't necessarily mean they are. As talks are ongoing at this point to try to get the show on another network or streaming service, there is going to be lots of speculation and rumors concerning who's out or who's got the upper hand in securing the rights to broadcast potential future seasons of the show. There is even the possibility that things could completely fall through. Just like with the news of the cancellation by Disney Channel, which had a lot of speculation and rumor ahead of that, we cannot jump to any quick conclusions, and any news about this must be linked to reliable sources, which includes their reputation for fact-checking.

Why I'm in doubt about TheWrap article: they make only two statements in the entire article having to do with Netflix's being out, neither of which sounds authoritative. (1) "TheWrap has learned that Netflix will not be picking up the recently canceled Disney Channel sitcom for more episodes." (2) "There's no word yet if Hulu or another platform may pick up the show though Netflix will not be its savior." A lack of additional content addressing the issue, like actual word from a Netflix executive regarding such a decision, casts doubt on the reliability. Thoughts? MPFitz1968 (talk) 19:39, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Another source, Deadline clearly states:"Will Girl Meets World continue elsewhere? While the most obvious new home candidate, Netflix, is not interested, Jacobs is still trying and hopeful but also content if this is indeed the end." Vmars22 (talk) 00:27, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Anything like that is pure speculation – let's just wait until there is a WP:RS report that everybody has passed on it (more likely outcome), or that somebody has officially picked it up (less likely outcome), before adding anything to the article. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:14, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * E! News brings up how Michael Jacobs confirms he has given up finding a network for Girl Meets World after five months of searching. And he has said Netflix was not interested in reviving it. Can E! (for Entertainment News) be trusted as a reliable source? Marino13 (talk) 19:38, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Nom'd for 2017 CA Emmy
It should be noted that GMW was just nominated for it's 3rd and final Creative Arts Emmy Award for Outstanding Children's Program.24.35.162.197 (talk) 13:24, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Girl Meets World. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/07/17/second-wave-of-nominations-for-teen-choice-2014-announced/283935/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150911221457/http://www.youngartistawards.org/noms36x.html to http://www.youngartistawards.org/noms36x.html

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) 22:28, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 October 2017
In the main article, there should be an added paragraph in the beginning that discusses the series end. I know that there is a section that discusses it's cancellation, but there should be more info on that at the top of the article that summarizes reasons for the series' end. It should read:

"After both the cast and Disney stayed quiet for a while on the series' future, rumors started spreading about the show possibly moving to Freeform . The series' writers put these rumors to rest after announcing on a group twitter account that show would be ending altogether. The series finale aired January 20, 2017 after a total of 72 episodes. JosephTrem (talk) 20:18, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ❌ The current lead actually needs to be cut down, but this info is not relevant to the lead. The lead should give a basic outline, such as when it premiered and ended among other things, and then other sections can go into more detail. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 20:33, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 December 2017
Add the following to the page's section on production about the episode Girl Meets I Am Farkle.

In 2015, Girl Meets World, aired an episode titled Girl Meets I Am Farkle, in which Farkle, one of the show’s protagonists, who is known for his quirky personality, may have Asperger’s syndrome. Throughout the episode, another protagonist, Maya is resistant of the idea of Farkle having Asperger’s, as she doesn’t want him to feel like he’s different or that something is wrong with him. By the end of the episode, it is discovered that he had been misdiagnosed, but a recurring character, Isadora Smackle, who has romantic feelings for Farkle and, later in the series, becomes his girlfriend, does indeed have Asperger’s. The other characters are very understanding and accepting of this. She mentions that she is very touch sensitive but is working on it, and when Farkle wants to give her a hug, she says it makes her somewhat uncomfortable, but she wants to try it anyway.

Girl Meets World was frequently known for tackling more serious issues than other Disney Channel shows of its time were willing to, very much so because it was a spinoff of the ABC 90’s sitcom, Boy Meets World. Boy Meets World dealt with alcoholism, absentee parents, and even death. In an era when most Disney Channel sitcoms were simple, silly comedies, Girl Meets World dealt with religion, poverty, and death as well. To deal with mental disability was another big step for both the show and the channel. In a Huffington Post article written about this episode specifically by the mother of a 6-year-old, she mentions that “even on the channels we’ve always trusted, some of the shows are full of sass and even border on bullying sometimes. One show (Girl Meets World) consistently gets it right, though, so we watch religiously as a family.” She felt the episode represented Asperger’s “in an authentic way and succeeded in sending the best message possible” and that “it’s really nice to see a family TV show get it right.”

The existence of Smackle’s diagnosis was hinted at later throughout the series, with her touch-sensitivity, hyperfixations, and occasional loud outbursts being noticeable, but never again referred to by name. Arguably, the most notable moment involving her character’s personality following Girl Meets I Am Farkle was in Girl Meets A Christmas Maya. In this episode, the friend group performs a secret Santa gift exchange to the dismay of everyone except the main protagonist, Riley, as no one knows what to get one another. At first, all of the gifts given appear to be offensive to the recipient in some way, but it is discovered that each has a heartfelt meaning behind it. Another recurring character, Zay, gives Smackle a book on etiquette, which concerns her at first, but when she looks inside, she notices that Zay crosses certain things out and makes his own little notes to show Smackle that she shouldn’t feel the need to follow anyone else’s expectations of her and that she should just be herself. Likely, much of the reason Smackle’s diagnosis was not dealt with in more detail was due to her being a recurring and not main character. Additionally, many, including the cast and crew, expected the show to be renewed for a fourth season but it was shockingly cancelled after three. The producers hoped to delve into even more mature and serious topics in a potential fourth season but were never given the chance to do so. Had it been renewed, perhaps we would have seen Smackle’s diagnosis acknowledged even more. Shake108 (talk) 02:57, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: The proposed text is editorializing with no reliable sources and I suspect it's original research. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 16:49, 15 December 2017 (UTC)