Talk:List of Paramount+ original programming

repeated re-addition of unnecessary templates
hey : curious as to why you think reverting my removal of wholly unnecessary templates and adding them back somehow constitutes restoring this article to its last "GOOD" version. Also not super-thrilled that you came to my Talk page to tell me how I was editing disruptively when I've made clear justifications in my edit summaries as to why I'm removing them (since tables can sort dates natively without the use of templates) whereas you've provided no explanation for why your reverts improve the article.

It's clearly mentioned in the template's documentation to be careful that the template is needed. In nearly all cases in this article, it is not. The exceptions are the one table with two entries that have multiple dates in a single cell in an unbulleted list and two entries where the month and year but not the day are specified, all of which I accounted for in my edits.

Please revert your re-addition of these unnecessary templates. —Joeyconnick (talk) 21:33, 11 July 2022 (UTC)


 * No. Pages for Disney+ and HBO Max have the same exact stuff as this page. If you're going to complain about it here, then why not remove those at the other pages? BrickMaster02 (talk) 21:42, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah no, that's not a valid argument. Just because other pages have unnecessary things doesn't mean we can't fix things here. People improving articles do not have to improve those same things in every. single. article. ever. because that would be insane and would mean we'd never improve article.
 * Also, "other pages do this" is a well-known non-argument. You have yet again not said why we need these wholly unnecessary templates. "They use them in other pages" is not an argument for keeping them here. —Joeyconnick (talk) 02:42, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:07, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Paramount+ logo.png

Awaiting release : German Orginals
the list for german originals. The series of the seich starts on December 22 and the chemistry of death starts on January 12, 2023 according to German sources Serienfan555 (talk) 12:04, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Carbits90
Okay, I am getting sick of the edits getting reverted, so I'm going to settle this dispute once and for all. My Dream Quinceañera, Beavis and Butt-Head, and Are You the One? ARE continuations. Even though Paramount+ does not say it or consider it, the news says otherwise. If you go on Pluto TV or any of the press releases, you know that My Dream Quinceañera is an already existing show, and the press release literally says "Prior to its Paramount+ revival, MY DREAM QUINCEAÑERA was born as an AwesomenessTV YouTube series that spanned 39 seasons and more than 230 episodes".

As for Beavis and Butt-Head, the title for this news article speaks for itself. Same goes for Are You the One?, as the press release calls it a new season. "Paramount+ today announced that a new season featuring a global version of the hit dating competition series ARE YOU THE ONE? will premiere exclusively on the service Wednesday, Jan. 18 in the U.S. and Canada."

And for 1923, regardless where the news came from, it was published from a reliable source.

@Carbits90, please discuss your points in more detail here. BrickMaster02 (talk) 00:21, 30 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Where on earth are you two fighting over? There seems to be a choice in where to put the info, but an edit war is not useful at all. The Banner  talk 13:18, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Should lists of upcoming programs be allowed?
There is a long running discussion on if the list of upcoming programs on this page falls under the no EPGs rule. This is following an update to this page in which the list of upcoming programs was removed citing this rule

It would be good to get additional input: Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not JordanP7893 (talk) 15:49, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Bad Link
Nisf I am still getting this reference as a bad link: James Kevin McMahon (talk) 18:18, 10 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Weird, the link was working as of an hour ago on my end. Thanks for the screenshot - I updated to a more recent url for the same article. Please let me know if it is working now. (By the way, if you had originally stated that you were changing the source due to a broken link, I would not have reverted your edit - apologies for any misunderstanding.) Nisf (talk) 18:47, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * It is working perfectly ok now. I just repaced it with the reference I had used for Cristina Rodlo, but the source you are using is great too. James Kevin McMahon (talk) 20:43, 10 April 2023 (UTC)