Talk:The Last of Us (TV series)/Archive 1

Ready for mainspace?
It looks ready for mainspace, but do not want to rush it if I'm wrong. Thoughts?  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 21:19, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , I know that for WP:FILM, the film has to have started principal photography before having a page on the main space but I'm unsure of how it works for TV. QueerFilmNerd  talk 21:32, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I had a look through MOS:TV (not a huge TV editor so I could have missed something) and I could not find anything regarding this.  Spy-cicle💥   Talk? 21:43, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * There is a general consensus on MOS:TV that when it started filming or that it has an official premiere date on the original network is when it is ready for the mainspace. Otherwise, it is not ready for mainspace. Also, please see WP:TVSERIES which has a long explanation. —  Young Forever (talk)   22:19, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah I see, thanks for the clarification.  Spy-cicle💥   Talk? 23:28, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Is Tommy really a "main" character?
Howdy. Just curious as to y'all's thoughts on Tommy being listed as a "main" character. I personally think this is giving his character a bit of undue weight, seeing as how he will likely only appear in a few episodes based on available evidence. Why is he a "main" character while Tess is only "recurring", for instance? I understand that the show isn't out yet so we don't technically know if his role has been massively expanded, but we have still included Tess as a recurring character even though she and Tommy have roughly similar amounts of screentime in the game. Silver181 (talk) 16:37, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * My assumption is that it's based on the casting announcements. Luna was announced as a "lead", while Torv was announcement as "recurring". Drovethrughosts (talk) 20:39, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Bizarre. I can't imagine why a character who appears in 2-3 episodes is a "lead" while another who also appears in 2-3 is merely "recurring". Guess we can see and make a judgment when the show comes out, even though I strongly suspect that Joel and Ellie will be the only characters who actually appear in a meaningful sense in a majority of the episodes. Silver181 (talk) 21:12, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * There will be no judgement to make for the article, since that's not up to us; "lead" and "recurring" roles are set by the studios, and we follow that. – Rhain  ☔ 22:25, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Indeed. I suppose what I'm trying to say is that I'm curious to see if the final product will actually bill Luna as a "lead" or if that was early-development weirdness. Obviously there's nothing to do with it for now. Silver181 (talk) 02:49, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Not sure which exact sources we are using to determine the specific category of the actors' roles, but it may be notable that the official HBO page for the show was recently updated and now only lists Pascal and Ramsey as "stars" whereas Luna is grouped together with Dandridge and Torv as "also joining the cast". Don't quite know if this is significant or not. Silver181 (talk) 03:51, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
 * That definitely gives the impression that he'll be "recurring" rather than a lead, but since it doesn't say it explicitly, we'll have to stick with what Deadline originally reported. Interestingly, that official site also lists Jeffrey Pierce alongside the guest stars (Parker, Bartlett, Offerman), but the original announcement made it pretty clear that he was recurring. Either the information has changed, or the ordering on the official site isn't meant to imply anything (i.e. could easily have been written by an intern without any knowledge of contracts). – Rhain  ☔ 04:04, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Filming section: a bit overkill
I feel the filming section is quite bloated and is standing at 7 paragraphs long and the series is still filming, which means the section will only get longer. Most of the section comes across as WP:NOTNEWS, and we seem to be reporting on every single little detail. All the sources come from local news websites as opposed to more notable websites or outlets. Local news tend to report on minutia which might not be notable in the grand scheme of things.

On what I think can be trimmed...

Paragraph 1:


 * The mention of "this actor posted an image on social media" is not notable. The fact that filming began one week later than originally reported isn't that big of a deal. A delay of several months for a certain reason would be notable to mention. This isn't the case.

Paragraph 2:


 * Most of this paragraph is overkill and excessive in detail, talking about road closures and tree budgets. It should essentially boil down to "it filmed in Fort Macleod from x date to y date".

Paragraph 3:


 * Not bad, but some minor trimming can be done. Mentioning traffic jams and road closures is excessive. This is business as usual when it comes to filming in real locations.

Paragraph 4:


 * Anything be written as " reportedly" or "spotted" should go. Again, we're not a news reporting website. Same goes for mentioning exact date for street closures. Should just be "filmed in these locations on these dates".

Paragraph 5:


 * Not bad, but some trimming can be had. Stuff like "with preparations from November 1–16 and streets closed from November 15–20" can go. It's just excessive detail.

Paragraph 6:


 * Again, details about road closures or traffic disturbances is overkill.

If other editors can please weigh in because I feel the section needs to be pared down significantly. Thanks. Drovethrughosts (talk) 17:34, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Filming is set to conclude in less than three weeks. The section is pretty much as long as it's going to get. – Rhain  ☔ 00:02, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Right, but that doesn't change the fact that the section is full of excessive details that should be significantly pared down per WP:NOTNEWS. Drovethrughosts (talk) 12:17, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Fair enough; I did . – Rhain  ☔ 13:16, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

"Tlou (tv series)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Tlou (tv series) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Rusalkii (talk) 05:22, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Percent vs % sign
There's been a couple of revisions over the rotten tomatoes score using % vs percent. MOS:PERCENT says to seemingly say the word vs the symbol but pretty much every rotten tomatoes score on other movie/tv show uses the symbol. I think we should use the symbol for consistencyKjtrill (talk) 08:26, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Other articles aren't really relevant. The Manual of Style takes precedence, so MOS:PERCENT—"percent", not "%"—should be followed. – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 09:47, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Saw this after reverting, % is the standard practice across Film and TV articles so should be discussed at a WikiProject level, can look for a bot to change if consensus develops for percent, but for now this article should be consistent. Thanks, Indagate (talk) 13:36, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I see no TV-specific guideline about this, so will continue defaulting to MOS:PERCENT. – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 13:42, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * No guideline that I can see yet, but standard practice across the Film and TV project, boilerplate text like this should be consistent.
 * Also, not worth making a new section for this, but list-defined and archives are a big waste of effort for RT MC, especially now when it's about to premiere, they are rapidly changing so should be within the text. Indagate (talk) 13:49, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I get that it's "standard practice", but guidelines still take precedence. (I hear you re: RT/MC too, but it takes me like two minutes to update the refs so it's not a big deal—and I suspect a lot of the passers-by aren't likely to update the accessdate etc. no matter where the ref is placed.) – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 14:02, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * If the guidelines don't reflect actual standard practice across thousands of articles, then the guideline must be changed. Guidelines document practices, they don't dictate them. oknazevad (talk) 17:00, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Sure, but that would be a conversation for WT:DATE, not here. – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 07:50, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I concur with that it is standard practice to use "%" on across the Film and TV project. —  Young Forever (talk)   02:07, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * This feels like a pretty dumb thing to get in an argument over... but if you want an outsider's opinion, I'll note that the MOS says it is "commonly", not "always", written out. Therefore, requiring the use of "percent" instead of "%" is not a correct reading of the MOS. RunningTiger123 (talk) 15:24, 14 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Another thing to consider is a sentence at the start of MOS:NUM: "maintain consistency within an article unless there is a good reason to do otherwise". It's perfectly valid if other editors consider Rotten Tomatoes "a good reason" to be inconsistent, but personally I don't. – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 15:58, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Leland and Mumba
I see that Brad Leland and Natasha Mumba's castings are still noted in the Filming section but neither are listed in the Cast section anymore. Wondering if they should be readded there or if their roles are considered too small for inclusion. Rusted AutoParts 11:03, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Good catch. They definitely seemed more significant when we only knew about like 10 other cast members, but that's certainly not the case now. I've removed the mentions. – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 11:07, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

No. of Episodes
Hey, someone should change the No. of Episodes in the Info-Box to 9. I don't have permission. Unless this is intended, since as of now only one episode has been show. Thanks! Peyre~dewiki (talk) 19:10, 19 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Hey, the infobox only has the number of episodes that have aired. Thanks, Indagate (talk) 19:33, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * ❌: Only one episode so far. Per Infobox television, This parameter should only be incremented when new episodes or specials air. — Young Forever (talk)   19:37, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Episode 1 “synopsis” is poorly written
I think it could be tightened up, and perhaps shortened. Some sentences are too long and it reads like a middle-school paper. 12.155.24.82 (talk) 12:54, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * If you'd like to improve it, you're welcome to make an actual suggestion. – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 12:57, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I cleaned it up.RaCJ1325 (talk) 00:52, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Episodes link Infobox
Can you link the value for num_episodes in Infobox television to #Episodes, or come up with something for list_episodes to link to that section. Thx. --2001:1C06:19C9:400:EFA1:E35:48B5:5C6C (talk) 05:56, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Per Infobox television, list_episodes is for "List of" articles. If readers want to see the list of episodes, they can use the table of contents or just scroll a tiny bit. – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 06:02, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Zombie apocalypse
I've included the phrase "zombie apocalypse" in the lede two times, which seems to be more informative than just repeating "post-apocalyptic". Many sources say that the series depicts or takes place after a zombie apocalypse, e.g. The Washington Post. As it is, the lede doesn't even mention zombies. –St.nerol (talk) 10:35, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree, this is a prototypical zombie show, even if the infected are called something else in-universe. – Anne drew  18:18, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes. Might be wrong, but I think it's really not that common for zombies to actually be referred to as such in universe. Anyway, we're now describing them as "hostile, cannibalistic creatures resembling zombies". Resembling. Well, if it looks like a zombie, walks like a zombie, and growls like a zombie, then it probably is a zombie. So, simplify in lede? I also liked having the link to "zombie apocalypse", since it's more specific. --St.nerol (talk) 22:31, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Honestly, I can live with "resembling zombies". At least the word zombie is in the lead unlike our article about the source material. – Anne drew  20:02, 30 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Well, I guess it's not terrible. Still, I'm quite sure that a less circuitous summary would benefit the lede. How about writing "the series is set in 2023, twenty years after a mass fungal infection caused a zombie apocalypse", instead of the much longer current wording "... twenty years after a mass fungal infection caused by a mutation in the genus Cordyceps sparked a global pandemic. The infection causes its hosts to transform into rabid, hostile creatures resembling zombies."


 * Not being a gamer myself, I will leave the issue regarding the other article to others! –St.nerol (talk) 10:41, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 February 2023
Change "commits suicide" to "dies by suicide" in episode 5 synopsis. 80.111.105.82 (talk) 18:00, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Good point. Done. Rutsq (talk) 18:38, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Episode 5 release date
Episode 5 came out today (Friday, March 10th), instead of the usual Sunday release date. 2601:1C0:6800:13C0:1820:C54A:3D27:52BE (talk) 06:18, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I think you mean February, but yes, that is already noted in the article. – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 06:19, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @Rhain hi you good it's my first time in Wikipedia yes it seems friendly and nice Coolfishsonpigs (talk) 16:47, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't see why it should be with "linear release date", the column refers to "original" release date which WAS 10th of February. Keeping it 12th February doesn't change the fact that it was ORIGINALLY released on 10th. TerminatorZXY (talk) 21:36, 13 February 2023 (UTC)


 * @TerminatorZXY The column refers to the original air date, I recommend reading it properly. The viewer column will also provide ratings that correspond to the February 12 airing, not the February 10 release. If the date listed was February 10, the viewer column would have to report N/A, because there was no broadcasting viewers who watched the episode on February 10 (it was an online release). -- Alex_ 21 TALK 00:02, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Episode 5 references are still incorrect (as of 2/15). It shows Feb 12, but the citation is for Feb 10 and the viewership is referencing Feb 12 as well. It's confusing and appears incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.104.188.50 (talk) 12:20, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Nope, everything is correct as of . The linear airdate is listed in the table, the early online release in the footnote. Both are confirmed by the reference. – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 12:23, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Mario Kart: The Movie
Hello, can someone please watch this on YouTube? This clip states that there is a weird new Mario Kart movie sketch with Padro [sic!] Pascal portraying Mario.

Is it part of The Last of Us TV series? Or is it something else on Pedro Pascal’s filmography?

Someone please watch this because I have to keep myself away from potentially questionable content.

— 88.152.35.126 (talk) 16:25, 10 February 2023 (UTC)


 * It's a bit from Saturday Night Live. I don't think it merits any mention here.  Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 16:27, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * it is briefly mentioned as part of Pascal's appearance on SNL. M asem (t) 16:34, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Big thanks for the information! — 88.152.35.126 (talk) 13:49, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 February 2023
Hello! I would like to add a line on the title sequence and its hidden meanings (easter eggs). Original - Elastic created the show's title sequence; Mazin enjoyed the idea of the fungus appearing beautiful despite its destructive nature.

Changed - Design studio Elastic came up with an elaborate title sequence that shows the unrelenting nature of cordyceps and implants clues to how the fungi overran and consumed humanity. Mazin enjoyed the idea of the fungus appearing beautiful despite its destructive nature.

Reference - https://movieweb.com/the-last-of-us-clues-hidden-in-the-credits-sequence/ Rakonteur (talk) 14:15, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅, though with different sources and phrasing. – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 01:42, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 March 2023
Add column under Starring

Guest starring Nico Parker Gabriel Luna Anna Torv Merle Dandridge Nick Offerman Murray Bartlett Melanie Lynskey Jeffrey Pierce Lamar Johnson Keivonn Woodard Graham Greene Elaine Miles Rutina Wesley Storm Reid Ashley Johnson 139.47.41.167 (talk) 02:22, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * That's not a valid parameter of Infobox television. It is for lead actors only. – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 02:23, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Ep 5 Wrong Release Date
Episode 5 was released on February 10, 2023 Not February 12, 2023 as shown in the article. This was because of the Super Bowl being on that Sunday Rrrcrrr (talk) 01:30, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Its original air date was February 12. The early online release is detailed in the footnote. – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 01:42, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Based on?
The text describes the show as "based on a video game" on a number of occasions, but a number of passages in the article describe a desire to diverge or "stay away from the game version", etc. With these intentional differences, it seems that "inspired by" the game might be a better choice of words. Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 16:01, 7 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Its clearly "based on" as numerous scenes play out word for word from the game. M asem (t) 16:05, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 March 2023
Change 8 episodes in season 1 to 9 episodes https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/tv/a42541771/the-last-of-us-hbo-release-schedule/ Jh29 (talk) 18:40, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * we have it as nine episodes planned, but only 8 have aired. We don't update that number until airing. --M asem (t) 19:15, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 March 2023
The music on the carousel in se01ep7 is a bell version of the cure song "just like heaven". Quartzlens (talk) 02:16, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * This is detailed on the episode article. – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 02:18, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Ellie's sexuality
To begin with she's 14, she probably hasn't even settled on where she is at on the gender/sexuality spectrum yet. Her scene with Riley implies she has lesbian tendencies, but this scene is arguably more affectionate than sexual. Her sexual orientation is never a major emphasis of the series. Finally the site gamespot.com is not considered very reliable, and the article amounts to a reported Twitter conversation. Mazin promised not to change Ellie's sexual orientation, but he didn't emphasize it either. Unless there is a change in episode 9, it is not made explicit, and should not be included as a definitive statement in a character description for the series. (I don't know how explicit they made it in the game). MaxBrowne2 (talk) 22:30, 9 March 2023 (UTC) And by the way please stop the edit warring and WP:OWN beahviour. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 22:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Interpretations of the seventh episode are irrelevant; according to the showrunners, she is explicitly gay. Not sure where you got the impression that GameSpot "is not considered very reliable"; it is (I see no reason why it wouldn't be here as well), but I've added more sources anyway. – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 22:51, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I like Sue Perkins' quote, "I think the fact that I am gay is about the 47th most interesting thing about me". Maybe we can take the same approach with Ellie? Acknowledge it but don't over-emphasize it because... it doesn't really matter in the end. As a character she's far more interesting than just being gay. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 12:00, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Considering the relevant sentence takes up only 3% of Ellie's paragraph alone, I think it's safe to say it already takes that approach. – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 14:03, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Ratings
They have a misplaced decimal point, ktnx. 5.165.61.194 (talk) 05:42, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Not that I can see. What are you referring to? – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 05:45, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Can someone explain the Viewer counts? They make so little sense to me that I highly doubt their accuracy or meaningfulness. Almost twice as many people watched the last two episodes as the first? One third of the people watched a middle episode as the last two? Do people really just randomly watch episodes in that significant a number without watching from the beginning? Two thirds of the people that watched the last episodes skipped episodes in the middle of the series???? It's not like this is live TV... this literally makes zero sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calummckinney87 (talk • contribs) 00:30, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It's unlikely that most people skipped episodes or watched at random—they just likely caught up on HBO Max as the series gained traction, and then watched the later ones as they were airing on HBO. – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 00:35, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Also - only a little over half a million people watched episode 1? This is the most talked about show on TV right now... that figure doesn't seem to match up at all with real world anecdotal evidence of viewership. I'm 100% convinced that these numbers are so inaccurate as to be misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calummckinney87 (talk • contribs) 00:30, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * They are not inaccurate. That episode aired two months ago, so being "the most talked about show on TV right now" doesn't have much of an impact. (Besides, that figure is for linear viewers; it had almost five million including streaming.) – Rhain  ☔ (he/him) 00:39, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh - thank you! I was so confused... I thought these were total view counts. I'm new to trying to understand this stuff. I'd be happy to delete my questions.. but maybe its good to leave them with your answers for other people like me. I see now in the preceding paragraph it opens with the 4.7 million figure. I skimmed the table and then commented... my bad. Calummckinney87 (talk) 00:43, 14 March 2023 (UTC)