Talk:Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. (season 6)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

A new look for Quake

Bennet revealed her new look for the season. Is that enough by itself to put in the article at this time? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:39, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think we could add it with some commentary from those reporting on it (mentioning the added colour for example), and especially if someone has mentioned that the look appears to borrow from her Marvel Rising design. - adamstom97 (talk) 10:43, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Added. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:43, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did anyone notice the latest trailer played a cover version of this song? Is it worth adding? The problem is, I don't know who the cover artist is. --Kailash29792 (talk) 07:12, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Covers of songs in trailers is reasonably common, so I wouldn't add it unless there was decent discussion by reliable sources about it. - adamstom97 (talk) 10:01, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Guest Stars

Has anyone got sourses for Sherri Saum, Anthony Michael Hall, and Coy Stewart as they're listed without a source and I can't see them in the casting section?--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 11:29, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MCU Tie-in

The referenced source says "it’s possible the timeline changed into one that WASN'T among the 14 million possible futures that Dr. Strange saw". The article text (that adamstom97 has reverted to) says "the fifth season could explain the discrepancy by moving the sixth season into one of the 14 million alternate futures mentioned by Doctor Strange". To me this seems like a clear contradiction. If the timeline wasn't among those he saw, how can it be one of those he mentioned?

My version of the article said "the fifth season could explain the discrepancy by moving the sixth season into an alternate future not seen by Doctor Strange during Infinity War". How is that "unsourced", when it matches what Tim Baysinger actually wrote? Adaj (talk) 08:50, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If there are no objections, I will re-apply the edits Adaj (talk) 13:15, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA Nomination

Hi, I'd like to nominate Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. (season 6) to GA status. I've read the article, cross-examined it with the WP:GAC, and the final step is asking the main editors of the article. @Favre1fan93:, @Gonnym:, and @BlueMoonset:, are there any objections to this article being promoted to WP:GA status? Also, for Talk:Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. (season 7), Gonnym, I'm just a "trophy collector"? I want to help Wikipedia. I added that topicon because I thought it was just to symbolize that you liked the MCU. My mistake. Ping me if there are any objections, or DM me on Discord. Thanks. PhilCoulson20 (talk) 23:08, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • If you want to contribute then do so. Go to any article and add information which is missing or create a new article and submit it to WP:AFC. Nominating an article you haven't edited once isn't contributing and your very minimal editing experience and understanding of en.wiki guidelines make you not suitable for GA nomination or review. --Gonnym (talk) 23:11, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Anybody can nominate an article if they properly consult the main editors first. Also, personally attacking me, saying "I'm not suitable for the job" isn't kind or helpful. In Wikipedia's guidelines, anybody can nominate an article. PhilCoulson20 (talk) 23:50, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Seeing as you are currently under discussion regarding your lack of understanding of Wikipedia procedures, it isn't the best idea to continue doing what made the discussion start in the first place (ie requesting GA nominations with absolutely no editing experience). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 13:38, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Say what?

"It debuted to lower ratings but a higher audience than the previous season, and remained consistent in viewership."

I cannot figure out how to parse that sentence. It seems to be saying "It started with fewer viewers, but more viewers, and it kept the same number of viewers."

I suppose the second clause of the sentence could be interpreted differently, but "It started with fewer viewers, but they were on more drugs, and it kept the same number of viewers" doesn't help that much.

If Neilsen ratings have suddenly shifted to NOT representing number of viewers, perhaps we need a link there or something? And the last clause of the sentence still doesn't jive without some clarifying text such as "over the course of the series" or something.

71.236.204.7 (talk) 23:15, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've clarified the sentence. What it was saying was the premiere episode was a lower amount than past seasons, but higher than much of the previous season's episodes. After that, viewership remained consistent in the season, with no abnormal spikes or dips. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:37, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]