This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut 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.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Screenwriters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of screenwriting, screenwriters, and related topics 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.ScreenwritersWikipedia:WikiProject ScreenwritersTemplate:WikiProject Screenwritersscreenwriter
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles 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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City
The article specifically states "A season and a half before Norman Lear made "relevant" programming a dominant genre with the introduction of programs like All in the Family and Maude, Room 222 was using the form of the half-hour comedy to discuss serious contemporary issues." Such issues which were made into Room 222 topics included "racism, sexism, homophobia, dropping out of school, shoplifting, drug use among both teachers and students, illiteracy, cops in school, guns in school, Vietnam war veterans, venereal disease, and teenage pregnancy."[1]Speakfor23 (talk) 19:43, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are promoting opinionated accusations. The very reliable Television Academy Foundation has stated that "A season and a half before Norman Lear made "relevant" programming a dominant genre with the introduction of programs like All in the Family and Maude, Room 222 was using the form of the half-hour comedy to discuss serious contemporary issues."[3]Speakfor23 (talk) 20:07, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Despite the popularity of Norman shows, the claim he introduced the political and social commentary to television sitcoms isn't true. The Television Academy Foundation even noted how Lear's company Tandem Productions used the "new narrative ground" Room 222 using, stating that "Room 222 broke new narrative ground that would later be developed by the major sitcom factories of the 1970s, Grant Tinker's MTM Enterprises and Norman Lear's Tandem Productions."[4] Aside from Room 222 predating Lear's reknowned 1970s sitcoms in the United States, we should even note the British show which All In The Family was based on called Til Death Us Do Part.Speakfor23 (talk) 20:29, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I reviewed both sources cited to the statements made. The first source says, "Lear’s shows were the first to address the serious political, cultural and social flashpoints of the day – racism, abortion, homosexuality, the Vietnam war — by working pointed new wrinkles into the standard domestic comedy formula." The other source says nothing about Lear and shouldn't even be cited to the statement. No sources use the word "provided" or anything remotely like that word. That statement doesn't even sound right when you say it out loud. How could his shows have provided political and social themes to the sitcom format. His shows are in the sitcom format. They provide nothing. I move that this is a violation of WP:SYNTH and WP:OR. I also question whether the statement is grammatically correct. Speakfor23, you seem to be too heavily invested in a particualr point of view and pushing hard for that point of view to be established in this article based solely on your opinion of Norman, which you have stated multiple times. The problem is that our personal opinions do not belong in Wikipedia articles unless they are directly supported by sources we cite. In fact, generally speaking, the lead should have no citations because it should just be a summary of what is already stated and cited within the article. Regardless of that, you are both engaged in edit warring. Knock it off please. --ARoseWolf11:58, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with everything you've said User:ARoseWolf. Yet, Speakfor23 has reverted my language of "His shows are credited with introducing political and social themes to the sitcom format" (adding "credited with" to try to reach a resolution) and returned to the nonsensical phrasing of "His shows provided political and social themes to the sitcom format." When editing against what i consider troll-like stuff, I don't consider my impish behavior warring, but I'll let others fix the problem if they'd like for now.--Milowent • hasspoken13:19, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think Speakfor23 is a troll. They are not vandalizing the article. There is a set of specific edits which are exempt from the classification of edit warring. This is not one of them. --ARoseWolf14:08, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can claim "provided." However, it would false to claim they "introduced" it. There have been many media claims which even Wikipedia has pointed out are not true. The Room 222 article by the Television Academy Foundation which brough up Lear sure was interesting.[6]Speakfor23 (talk) 13:59, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can not claim provided as that is not in any source you cite. It is you combining sources included one that doesn't even mention Lear to form an opinion. Simply stating that there are "many" sources is not the answer. You have to provide the sources which explicitly say what you are trying to convey without having to pull multiple sources together to form the basis for your argument. Interviews are not reliable sources therefore your cited source is immaterial, whether it is interesting or not is a matter of opinion. --ARoseWolf14:05, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you telling falsehoods. The Television Academy Foundation article clearly states "the show broke new narrative ground that would later be developed by the major sitcom factories of the 1970s, Grant Tinker's MTM Enterprises and Norman Lear's Tandem Productions" and that A season and a half before Norman Lear made "relevant" programming a dominant genre with the introduction of programs like All in the Family and Maude, Room 222 was using the form of the half-hour comedy to discuss serious contemporary issues. During its five seasons on the air, the show included episodes that dealt with such topics as racism, sexism, homophobia, dropping out of school, shoplifting, drug use among both teachers and students, illiteracy, cops in school, guns in school, Vietnam war veterans, venereal disease, and teenage pregnancy."[7] Norman Lear, his company Tandem Productions, and his shows All In The Family and Maude were cited by name in the article which noted how Room 222 predated All In The Family with "serious contemporary issues."Speakfor23 (talk) 17:45, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, per WP:ONUS, the burden of proof is on you. I'm saying, per the reliable sources cited to the statement and about Lear, it is not false. That's all we can go on unless you have a reliable source which states that it is false. Anything else is WP:SYNTH and WP:OR. --ARoseWolf14:12, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, the Television Academy Foundation article clearly states Room 222 did so before Lear and All In The Family. The burden of judgement is on you. Lear's classic shows may have higher ratings and a significant popular culture impact, but they did not predate Room 222 when it came to discussing "serious contemporary issues." Tha Television Academy Foundation even noted that Room 222 "broke new narrative ground that would later be developed by the major sitcom factories of the 1970s, Grant Tinker's MTM Enterprises and Norman Lear's Tandem Productions." [8] The media even falsely hyped the Higgs Boson as the "god particle," despite the fact that even Peter Higgs himself denied it was this. The claim that Norman Lear introduced serious political and social issues to sitcoms is not true.Speakfor23 (talk) 17:41, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are clearly displaying WP:IDHT. You are showing WP:OWN and now you have moved into WP:NPA territory. Your source is an interview with the creators, directors and those close to the development of Room 222 so it is primary. We have an independent reliable source which makes a statement about Lear's programs being first. Per Wikipedia policy on reliable sources we are to accept a secondary reliable source over a primary interview that is not independent of the claim made. For example, if x politician says something is true in an interview in their own words we may include that but if an independent reliable source says the opposite is true then that takes precedent over an interview. The content mostly likely will be amended to what the independent source says or may be removed altogether. There are exceptions, as always. You need to find a source independent of Room 222 that states this as fact. --ARoseWolf18:44, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article is now more neutral and grammatically correct. It removes any mention of who was first and now does not make the claim but also changes poorly written sentences. It takes the sources provided to say that his shows addressed in the place of provided current political and social issues in a sitcom format. I also removed the part about Room 222 in the article as the subject had nothing to do with that production and the source provided is not a secondary reliable source. --ARoseWolf19:15, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your new edit summary allegations that the Television Academy Foundation articles is based on interviews related to production members of Room 222 is not cool. That is another lie. You can even watch reruns of the show for yourself.Speakfor23 (talk) 20:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The title of the source is Television Academy Foundation: The Interviews (emphasis mine). You can watch and listen to interviews with persons who worked on the project. It is not an article and the Television Academy Foundation does not credit or write anything about Room 222 or Norman Lear. The part you have been incorrectly attributing to the TAF was actually said by Robert Thompson in the Museum of Broadcast Communications Encyclopedia of Television, published in 1997. If you had left well enough alone the article would have been improved by changing introduced to addressed. With doing that, however, it removes any claim and the part about Room 222 is no longer due. At the very least it should be attributed properly. Your personal attacks on me are unwarranted. I have never vandalized any article during my time here on Wikipedia. And anytime I make a mistake I address it and correct it. --ARoseWolf11:20, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
