Talk:Saturday Night Live season 41

Television: Episode coverage Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Colour contrast problems[edit]

It seems that this article is using colours in the infobox which don't satisfy Wikipedia's accessibility guidelines. The contrast between the foreground colour and the background colour is low, which means that it may be difficult or impossible for people with visual impairments to read it.

To correct this problem, a group of editors have decided to remove support for invalid colours from Template:Infobox television season and other television season templates after 1 September 2015. If you would still like to use custom colours for the infobox and episode list in this article after that date, please ensure that the colours meet the WCAG AAA standard.

To test whether a colour combination is AAA-compliant you can use Snook's colour contrast tool. If your background colour is dark, then please test it against a foreground colour of "FFFFFF" (white). If it is light, please test it against a foreground colour of "000000" (black). The tool needs to say "YES" in the box for "WCAG 2 AAA Compliant" when you input the foreground and the background colour. You can generally make your colour compliant by adjusting the "Value (%)" fader in the middle box.

Please be sure to change the invalid colour in every place that it appears, including the infobox, the episode list, and the series overview table. If you have any questions about this, please ask on Template talk:Infobox television season. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:30, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First group of hosts announced[edit]

It's great to see Tracy resuming his life and his career. It's gonna be a great show, and there'll certainly be more than a few moist eyes that night. Also I hope they have something special planned for Amy Schumer's show after midnight, because at that point, it'll officially be the 40th anniversary of George Carlin's premiere on 10/11/1975.

All in all, it looks like a great start to the new season.

Fgoron2000 (talk) 17:18, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Writers for Season 41[edit]

Why hasn't anyone created a link to the List of Saturday Night Live writers? Additionally, why hasn't anyone created a separation section on the writer's page for the list of writers for this season? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.82.161.43 (talk) 21:53, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Episode 10 delay[edit]

Is it worth noting in the article that the start of the broadcast (though not the taping) for episode 10 was delayed because of the NFL game? I believe it's relevant and could have an effect on ratings. It was noted in episode 11 of season 37.

Darrell Hammond[edit]

Why are we making special note of Hammond's appearances in sketches? Hammond is an official cast member as the announcer, even if he's not listed among the sketch players. I don't see the same treatment given to Don Pardo's appearances/performances in sketches, which happened with some frequency in the show's early years. (Or, for that matter, to Lorne Michaels). 16:06, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Presumably because his appearances as Trump are more notable than any other he's done without being a regular cast member. If he has other notable appearances, those should be noted in all the relevant places, IMHO. Thanks. --Jgstokes (talk) 20:34, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That begs the question. Why are they more noteworthy than, for example, on-camera appearances by Pardo or Michaels? No reason for this non-standard treatment has been advanced. And he is a regular performer on the show. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 11:39, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If such previous performances by Pardo or Michaels are notable, those can and should be included in the pages about the relevant seasons. I would have no objections to that. The only reasons I cite the importance of Hammond's appearances as Trump is that these appearances are relevant to SNL now. I am a relatively recent follower of SNL, which is why I am in a position to state the importance of Hammond's impersonations as Trump. In my mind, any notable appearance should be noted on the relevant season's page, but that's just MHO. Thoughts? --Jgstokes (talk) 22:28, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, stating supposed "importance" without any supporting argument is useless. We have a well-established consensus practice not to cite such appearances specially over the show's first few dozen seasons, and no basis is provided for making an exception here other than, it seems, the enthusiasm some editors have for documenting whatever they watched on TV. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 15:55, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I gave a supporting argument. It's not my fault if you don't like what I have to say. When we get down to brass tacks, what it comes down to is this: There is an established consensus for including Hammond's appearances as Trump, and it would take a consensus decision to reverse that decision. One such as you who claims to follow WP's rules should be keenly aware of that. Also, your signature does not inspire confidence in the validity of your opinion. At least, that's the way I see it. --Jgstokes (talk) 02:47, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]