Talk:Lab Rats (American TV series)

Improvement
I need your help in improving this article. Thank you! DJ0215997 (talk) 14:21, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Age
Umm, Bree is 15! It's mentioned on the website of Billy Unger. DJ0215997 (talk) 14:21, 4 August 2012 (UTC) Leo is 15 Chase is 16 Bree is 17 Adam is 18 Donald is 31 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.226.77.137 (talk) 00:31, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Requested move
I think this page should be moved to Lab Rats (2012 TV series) because there is a film and 2008 series this isn't the only series. Christopher10006 (talk) 20:11, 9 June 2014
 * I don't think a move is necessary as Lab Rats, the 2008 BBC Two sitcom, has a descriptive hatnote that points to this article, this article has a descriptive hatnote that points to the BBC sitcom, and the disambiguation page at Lab rat (disambiguation) also points to both pages with a disambiguated description. If this article were to be moved, all incoming links would need to be corrected and a disambiguation page created here to replace the redirect that would link to the correct of the two TV series. Some amount of work to do correctly and I think unnecessary for readers to find the correct article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:35, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Bionic Island title
The fourth season is being aired with the title Lab Rats: Bionic Island. Should this alternate title be mentioned somewhere in the article? AJFU (talk) 17:19, 19 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Mention it as an alternative title as there is a redirect with that title that points here. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:32, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Bold move contested
This article and the related list of episodes article cover all the seasons of this series, not just the last season so it is inappropriate to change the article name. Leave the redirect with the new name in place and mention the season 4 title in the lead will cover the situation. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:32, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Article split out character section
I plan to WP:SPLIT out the character section to List of Lab Rats characters, leaving a summary behind, as the current article is far too unbalanced with the massive detail in the character section section. I plan to do the split in a week or so if there are no objections. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:05, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * No objections from me. I'll make this article one of my next ones to get to before you do it so it's not as messy.


 * I am curious, though, and since I forgot to ask over on Mighty Med, what's the actual process like? Are all the characters moved over to a separate page while keeping the main characters listed here, but without descriptions since those will be on the character page? Amaury (talk) 02:43, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Basically should clean up the section before the split if possible. Then copy without changes the section to the new article with an edit summary at the destination stating where the text came from. For the character section I plan on just leaving the major actor and character names. After that is all done is just cleanup. WP:Splitting gives details. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:32, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

That should be good. Feel free to let me know if you disagree with anything, though. Ironically, I was going to get this soon, though not this soon, so it's just a coincidence that it also prepares for your split, haha. Also ironic is that no references were removed in this clean-up. Amaury (talk) 18:37, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Since there were no objections I went ahead and did the WP:SPLIT. Both this article and the character article need some cleanup as the only edits I did were minimal formatting edits. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:29, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Lab Rats: Elite Force premiere
Another editor has added the March 2016 premiere for Lab Rats: Elite Force in the Mighty Med article, with a link to the Facebook post that was talking about. I checked and it's from a verified account. Does this look good? If so, we could add it here too. nyuszika7h (talk) 20:52, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * She said "I believe is premieres March 2016", that is not a statement of any sort of certainty. She knows no more than anybody else. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:10, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅. Did this yesterday – Disney XD announced the premiere date as March 2 in a press release posted by The Futon Critic. Info has been added to article. Also, Lab Rats: Elite Force now has its own article. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:49, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Series "finale"?...
OK, we've had a number of IP editors recently try to add (unsourced, of course) that tonight's episode, "The Vanishing", is the "series finale" of Lab Rats. Now, no advertising or announcements from Disney (that I've seen) have announced this as such. However, with the premiere date of Lab Rats: Elite Force now known to be about a month from today, I find it quite plausible that "The Vanishing" is, in fact, set to be the last aired episode(s) of the Lab Rats series (proper).

So, what do we do? Is this one of those cases where we're going to have to leave the "end date" of the series open for a year, because Disney never comes out and states that "The Vanishing" is the finale?... Pinging ... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:57, 3 February 2016 (UTC)


 * It is well-referenced that both series are over and with the confirmed beginning of the sequel there won't be any overlapping of episodes as it makes no sense to do that. What we don't know is if the episode being shown later today is the last of the ones in the can or if there is something else yet to be shown. In this case we don't have to wait a year, it should be sufficient to wait for the sequel to start airing to confirm this one is finished if we don't get something explicit as a reference for the upcoming ep to be the final episode. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:23, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, Netflix says season 4 will be available from March 4. I can't seem to find that on the website, but on my TV it shows "Watch Season 4 on March 4". nyuszika7h (talk) 13:18, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I found this tweet from Bryan Moore, one of the show's creators. Disney is probably not advertising it as a finale because it's not really ending, just continuing in Elite Force. nyuszika7h (talk) 17:04, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, it occurred to me that Disney may not have wanted to advertise that as a the "series finale" so as not to negatively influence the premiere of Lab Rats: Elite Force... As to the Tweet, I am curious to see if Geraldo Perez considers that sufficient sourcing to put an end to this, and to go ahead and put down the Feb. 3 episode as the "series finale" once and for all... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:08, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * He knows the episode that aired is the planned finale. Possible, but unlikely, some held-back episode could be waiting. Schedules for month are out and nothing is shown so the fact that the last episode shown was the last ep of the series is not seriously in doubt. I suggest adding the info, using that reference, but as it is a primary source from someone not in control of network scheduling tag it with . Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:39, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅. Both here, and at List of Lab Rats episodes. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:12, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Lab Rats (U.S. TV series). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20151231012040/http://billy-unger.com/2011/01/15/disney-pilot-is-now-lajb-rats/ to http://billy-unger.com/2011/01/15/disney-pilot-is-now-lajb-rats/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 06:51, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Main character names
Crossposting this from 's talk page as he's busy, with some tweaks to wording.

While there is a working archive of the Show Bios page on Disney ABC Press, because it's Java, I can't actually open the characters' show bios as it sits there with "content loading" indefinitely. Thus, I can't actually see what the character names are listed as.

Currently, this and the LOC articles have the main characters listed as:


 * Billy Unger as Chase Davenport
 * Spencer Boldman as Adam Davenport
 * Kelli Berglund as Bree Davenport
 * Tyrel Jackson Williams as Leo Dooley
 * Hal Sparks as Donald Davenport

I am trying to figure out if those are what reliable sources actually said or if there's WP:INUNIVERSE information mixed in there that we shouldn't be including. Lab Rats: Elite Force won't help here as name sources used can change between series of the same type. For example, just because it's only "Chase" for Lab Rats: Elite Force doesn't necessarily mean sources didn't say "Chase Davenport" for Lab Rats.

The Futon Critic has them listed simply as follows: http://www.thefutoncritic.com/showatch/lab-rats/
 * Billy Unger as Chase
 * Spencer Boldman as Adam
 * Kelli Berglund as Bree
 * Tyrel Jackson Williams as Leo
 * Hal Sparks as Davenport

Does anyone remember what Disney ABC Press had, though, when the series was still airing? Did it support the "Davenport" and "Dooley" last names for the teen characters and "Donald" that the articles currently have listed? The Futon Critic and Disney ABC Press don't often match there as, for example, Disney ABC Press has last names for all the Raven's Home main characters, except Tess, while The Futon Critic only lists them with their first names, as seen here: http://www.thefutoncritic.com/showatch/ravens-home/

I mean, I guess if push comes to shove, we just go with the next best thing, what The Futon Critic has, listing them as shown in the second listing above, but I want to see if what Disney ABC Press had can be figured out first. Or maybe WP:COMMONNAME supports the first list above. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 22:57, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I know for Lab Rats: Elite Force, the names should be listed in the "short-version" you show second. For the original Lab Rats, I'm not sure. Like you, I can't get the 'Cast bios' archive to load. I had the idea of trying the Disney Now app, but they don't seem to have "cast/character" info (at least, not for Lab Rats, which they only have 3 episodes of!). I think we can defer to The Futon Critic on this, esp. if the Disney press releases included therein don't list the last names... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:07, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
 * All the episodes should be there. I'm binging it now. On Season 3: "Mission: Mission Creek High" now. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 23:18, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅: http://www.thefutoncritic.com/news/2011/07/13/disney-xd-orders-new-live-action-comedy-series-lab-rats-515115/20110713disneyxd01/ Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 17:19, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
 * It's actually JavaScript, I thought I already told you that. Java to JavaScript is like ham to hamster. ;) Anyway, I can't find it in the page source and archive.is doesn't have it archived either, so I guess Futon works. nyuszika7h (talk) 10:46, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I knew I was going to get that wrong. I even thought about it hard while writing about it about which one to use. lol Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 15:18, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 16 August 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 20:22, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Lab Rats (U.S. TV series) → Lab Rats – According to the page views, roughly 92% 94% of people searching for Lab Rats within the last year are searching for the Disney XD series. The exact number, as of this post, is 9,639 193,272 views, significantly higher than the other pages listed there—as the second highest is only 319 5,477 views—with the third page listed there just being a disambiguation page and the last page listed there just being a redirect to that disambiguation page. As such, Lab Rats (U.S. TV series) is very clearly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and should just be under the title of Lab Rats. It's also sufficiently disambiguated from Laboratory rat and is not a problem. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 17:28, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support – even looking over the entire year of page views: |Lab_Rats_(UK_TV_series)|Lab_Rats_(film)|Lab_Rats|Lab_rat_(disambiguation) doesn't change the assessment that the U.S. TV series is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:15, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose only known in US. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:34, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose per long-term significance. Laboratory rat, which is what the title of the series alludes to, is close in views to the series. It is listed as primary on the disamb. page but not included in the nomination numbers. Long-term significance should probably apply here. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:44, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:NATURALDIS'ed from this, and can be handled by a hatnote. Also note the difference in capitalization (and plural vs. singular): it's also worth noting that Lab Rats currently points to the disambig. page, not to Laboratory rat – if Lab Rats actually pointed to Laboratory rat the case against this move would be far stronger. But both WP:NATURALDIS and WP:SMALLDETAILS credibly apply here. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:30, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose Weak oppose Per Randy Kryn, we have multiple articles in the upper case as well as Laboratory rat. If it was just one or the other I probably would support.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 05:29, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The only related articles are Laboratory rat, Lab Rats (UK TV series), Portal 2: Lab Rat, and Lab Rats (film). The only "uppercase" article there is the Portal 2 one, but Portal 2 already makes it clear what it's from, and the US TV series is already sufficiently distinguishable from the Laboratory rat article, so I have no idea where this "multiple articles with uppercase" claim is coming from. With Lab Rats (U.S. TV series) having roughly 94% of the page views, it is clearly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and should be under the base title Lab Rats. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 06:13, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * There is also Lab Rats (CSI episode), though it doesn't have a separate article, so that gives us 4 articles in the upper case.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 06:25, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirects don't count, and even so, that's only two—Portal 2 and CSI. What are the other two uppercase ones? Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 06:29, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The other 2 you listed above.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 06:35, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Of the uppercase ones with articles, the UK TV series is roughly only 2.7% of the page views, the film is roughly only 0.7% of the page views, and the video game is roughly only 0.1% of the page views. Meanwhile, the US TV series is roughly 93.9% of the page views. So, again, the US TV series is clearly the primary topic here and should just be titled Lab Rats. It doesn't matter how many other pages there are in uppercase, singular, plural, etc. There could be 100 pages with Lab Rats in the title (uppercase), but if 99 of them each only equate to about 5% of the page views and the remaining one equates to about 95% of the page views, that remaining one shouldn't be disambiguated. It's not necessary. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 07:22, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I would add that a Google Books search for "Lab Rats" returns first mainly laboratory rats.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 07:36, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think we're too concerned with what external search results yield us. We care more about the statistics within Wikipedia itself that show how many page views articles get, and when it comes to disambiguation when there's more than one article with the same name, determining which article is the primary topic that shouldn't be disambiguated. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 07:42, 17 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose per User:In ictu oculi and User:Randy Kryn above. Paintspot Infez (talk) 00:26, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose – I'm not really sure about this, it has most of the page views here but it's still a pretty generic title even though it's capitalized and doesn't really have a lot of historical significance. nyuszika7h (talk) 15:12, 22 August 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Character list in plot section
I'm not being disruptive; I simply made the minimum changes to your edit to make the punctuation correct (and to add just enough context to explain why the characters matter), per MOS:SEMICOLON. In any case, there is a clear punctuation error here:

"the series introduces various new characters, including Davenport's younger brother Douglas, Douglas' android son Marcus, Krane and his bionic soldiers, Taylor, formerly known as S-1, Sebastian, formerly known as S-3, Giselle, and Troy West."

A list cannot be delimited by commas this way. First, as written, the sentence implies "formerly known as S-1" is a character (I know it isn't, but that's what grammar implies). Moreover, it is not clear which, if any, of the characters following Krane are "his bionic soldiers."

To be honest, I don't really care how it's worded, as long as it's written correctly; it's not helpful if you need to already know the subject material to comprehend a sentence like that. I believe my season-by-season edit and my most recent edit solved those problems. (And yes, "season 2" might have been an error, but not one that in and of itself justified reversion.) If you have another suggestion, which fixes the errors I cited, I'm perfectly fine with it. Samer (talk) 23:08, 15 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Can you quote your suggested changes, so we can compare to the above?... And, FWIW, in this case, I don't think you should have been reverted – yes, any errors you made should simply have been corrected. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:32, 15 August 2020 (UTC)


 * : Here's the season-by-season version: As the series progresses, the series gets darker with the introduction of several new characters. Season 2 introduces Douglas, Davenport's younger brother, who later joins the team, and Marcus, Douglas' android son. Season 3 introduces Victor Krane, a billionaire with bionic enhancements, and two of Krane's bionic soldiers: S-1, later known as Taylor, who joins the team during the fourth season, and S-3, later known as Sebastian. Season 4 introduces Giselle, a scientist who plans to rebuild Marcus, and Troy West, Giselle's android creation.


 * And here's the most recent one: As the series progresses, the series introduces various new characters, including Davenport's younger brother Douglas and Douglas' android son Marcus; Krane and his bionic soldiers, Taylor, formerly known as S-1, and Sebastian, formerly known as S-3; and scientist Giselle and her android Troy West. [I realize now that I accidentally left out the "and" before Sebastian, but that's also not an error that justifies reversion.] Samer (talk) 23:41, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Most of this is just basic grammar that shouldn't even be up for discussion. If you're listing items that also happen to have commas, then you're supposed to use semicolons to avoid confusion per MOS:SEMICOLON example 5, and also basic English. I don't see the need to revert good faith edits that are basically fixing grammar to improve readability. — Starforce13  00:00, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think I prefer the second one – let's go with that. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:57, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , do we need the "and" between "Douglas and Douglas's android son?" I think a semicolon would work better there as well. — Starforce13  03:45, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * : I put it that way because when I read it, I saw three logical groups (Doug, Krane, and Giselle, and their respective creations). As I said, though, I'm not wedded to my wording; I just want people to understand what they're reading. Samer (talk) 03:58, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, if the goal is to group them that way, then that might be our best option. — Starforce13  14:49, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

RFC about categorizing as a science fiction show
Can this article be included in categories for science fiction shows? Note, the reason that I'm going straight to RFC rather than a regular talk page discussion is because this is a very low traffic article that likely will have extremely few participants in a regular discussion. JDDJS ( talk to me  •  see what I've done ) 19:50, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Include The plot of the entire show revolves around scientifically enhanced superhumans. It is clearly a science fiction show. Yes, there aren't really any reliable sources that call it that, but that is solely due to the fact that live action Disney Channel/XD shows get extremely little coverage at all. JDDJS  ( talk to me  •  see what I've done ) 19:50, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I question the necessity of even having an RfC for a discussion that wasn't being disputed. A reminder: "Editors are expected to make a reasonable attempt at resolving their issues before starting an RfC" WP:RfC. Seeing as how you and I have both found a handful of reliable sources supporting the inclusion of the sci-fi genre since starting this discussion, it seems a little more effort in the beginning could have saved the collective editors' valuable time. Regardless, it has been fun discussing. It's a good note for all of us to keep in mind moving forward. Pickalittletalkalittle (talk) 20:01, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes – this was clearly a case where all that was needed was the equivalent of some WP:BEFORE work. I would support shutting down the RfC, and just continuing to discuss the details. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:14, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree. We may also be able to argue for consensus since all three oppositions use the supposed lack of reliable sources as their point of opposition. Pickalittletalkalittle (talk) 20:40, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose Neutral (while discussion continues) – What you are arguing for is classic WP:OR. That's not how Wikipedia works – we are supposed to choose genres and categories that are verifiable in sources, esp. independent secondary ones. The fact is, neither Disney nor outside sources call this show a "science-fiction" series. (Heck, I think they barely call it a "superhero" series, either!) Disney and sources define what this series is in terms of Wikipedia. There is no compelling reason to ignore guidelines like WP:CATVER in this case. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:55, 6 June 2022 (UTC) (changing !vote for now --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:56, 8 June 2022 (UTC))
 * Actually, Disney does call it a science fiction series on Disney+ (as well as Superhero, Action-Adventutre, Coming of Age and comedy). . JDDJS  ( talk to me  •  see what I've done ) 20:09, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose per U|IJBall. No personal evaluations! Amaury • 21:35, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose unless multiple independent reliable sources classify it as sci-fi.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:29, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * The problem with that is that there really aren't "multiple independent reliable sources" that talk about the show at all. JDDJS  ( talk to me  •  see what I've done ) 22:32, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * If there are not multiple independent reliable sources that talk about this, I would then question the notability of this information Dobble stein 🎲 🎲 talk 23:04, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Deadline has actually referred to it as science fiction multiple times. . JDDJS ( talk to me  •  see what I've done ) 22:38, 6 June 2022 (UTC) The New York Times said about it "Witness the sci-fi thriller as family sitcom, or maybe dramedy." . JDDJS ( talk to me  •  see what I've done ) 14:58, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak Support in addition to the deadline sources (I cannot access the Disney ones), some sources use "sci-fi-speak" eg "his inventor stepdad has three bionic, super-powered teens living cloistered in a secret lab beneath their home". Pincrete (talk) 04:07, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose as that genre is not directly supported by reliable sources in the article as it currently stands. I oppose any WP:OR or WP:SYNTHESIS that comes up with any genres based on personal evaluations of editors. I expect all genres in article to be sourced. I expect all genre categories to be supported by sourced article content. I will change to support if and when reliable sources are added to the article that explicitly state "science fiction" as a genre. I am open to considering the "Deadline" references and the "Disney+" classification as sources but would like to see consensus for that. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:47, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
 * The Deadline sources look to be genuine and usable (though the first two are stronger than the third) – they would support adding two or three more genres to this series' article. But I would say that that the genres on Disney+ alone would not be enough. It would be one thing if those genres were in the original Disney press releases on the show – but using just listed genres on Disney+ would be an incredibly weak (primary) source, IMO... Anyway, it'd be great if some sources besides Deadline (I'd look at Variety and THR for that) could be used as additional referencing for added genres, but I think on their own the Deadline cites can support listing additional genres. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:56, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Support Not only is this verifiable considering the above-sourced content (Deadline, New York Times, Disney (also, Geraldo Perez, here is a Disney source calling it sci-fi )), but it's also verified by tvguide.com, The Boston Herald , and Rotten Tomatoes to name a few.
 * Furthermore, I have zero sources opposing the inclusion of Lab Rats in the sci-fi genre. It seems to me this RfC was really a question of notability. Considering the sources (Rotten Tomatoes and TVGuide.com both appearing on the approved WP:RSP list, I support the inclusion of Lab Rats in the sci-fi genre.
 * That being said, sources that discuss Lab Rats in the terms of only one category, instead of a handful like the sources above, list the show as "comedy." So I agree in including Lab Rats with sci-fi, but "comedy" should remain listed first. Pickalittletalkalittle (talk) 18:43, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Deadline, at least, also lists "adventure" and "superhero", so those would be valid genres as well, esp. if other sources confirm it (and two of your listed sources also include "adventure"). However, note that the Boston Herald one does not explicitly categorize Lab Rats as "sci-fi" – it simply reports Chris Peterson's love of sci-fi. Also, your Rottentomatoes one represents a WP:SYNTH (as it's actually for the spinoff series) that is likely not usable. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:53, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Good point regarding other genres possible to include, although I'm not vested in that discussion at the moment. If someone is interested in including it, I say find the sources and WP:BEBOLD.
 * I think the argument of WP:SYNTH could be made for the Boston Herald article, even though I think the sentence, "Now the Boston native is bringing his love of the sci-fi genre to a fresh generation of viewers as the co-creator and executive producer of the new series 'Lab Rats,'" can at least be called a weak supporting source for the argument of inclusion. However, the Rottentomatoes link explicitly calls Lab Rats sci-fi in the description and is most definitely usable: "This spinoff series of Disney XD favorites "Lab Rats" and "Mighty Med" brings together characters from the two sci-fi shows to battle common enemies." Pickalittletalkalittle (talk) 19:32, 8 June 2022 (UTC)