We talked about this in the past, but I don't know where the conversation is archived. It's my understanding that VCDs (Video Compact Discs; like music CDs that have video files on them) sold in Asia (particularly the ones for Sesame Street home video releases) are mostly bootlegs. We don't cover bootlegs, only official releases. But at some point, someone started adding them to pages. Can anyone provide evidence that these aren't unauthorized releases? —Scott (message me) 21:00, March 8, 2012 (UTC)
- Well, from what I've been able to research, a lot of them are on Yesasia.com, which seems to be a huge online site for Asian products. There are a lot of them on there right now, and they seem to only deal in legitimate product. Their Wikipedia article is here, and their site seems to have been around a long time. Maybe Chris (MasterYoshi) can help us confirm this?
- I've also seen them on worldcat.org in major libraries. Maybe someone at the Workshop can confirm that they really did release them in this format? -- Ken (talk) 06:27, March 9, 2012 (UTC)
The style of page layout we use for Sesame videos is all over the place and has been a mess I've been meaning to clean up for a little while. For starters, we should nuke the template box. Those should be used when we need to present information about an article as a quick reference guide for the reader. Given the number of re-releases for Sesame videos, those boxes have become pretty pointless. It makes more sense just to include it in the gallery of VHS/DVD covers with the others. I'd also like to get rid of duplicating a VHS cover when it's the exact same release as the DVD. They've got the same catalogue number and the same picture. We don't need to show it again right next to the first version just a little skinnier. I've set up Sing Along as simply as possible, as an example of what I'm talking about. Compare with how it looked before and how messy other pages in the category look. I think we can simplify these and keep all the information in a more coherent way. —Scott (talk) 18:09, July 27, 2010 (UTC)
- I think that looks great! I totally agree. I made one change to the Sing Along page -- for some reason, we don't have dates for most of the releases, and I think those should be in the table. I added 1987 to the first release; if we had dates for the others, I think they'd be treated the same way. Toughpigs 04:21, July 28, 2010 (UTC)
- The reason a lot of dates are missing is that a lot of the Sony Wonder reissues only have the original Random House date, or the Sony Wonder VHS date (on Sony Wonder DVD's that were released later than the corresponding VHS). I have a lot of this in my own research, but I haven't looked at it in a while. -- Ken (talk) 04:30, July 28, 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, got it. I thought of another thing: This format works great for a video release that has been reissued, but I think a single-release DVD could still use the 300px photo at the top right. For example, Abby in Wonderland looks fine with the big cover at the top.
- To be consistent, we should take out the video box... We could either put the catalogue number in a Notes section, or put it in the photo caption. Toughpigs 08:27, July 28, 2010 (UTC)
- That makes sense for more recent releases, sure. As for dates, I didn't include them in the gallery on Sing Along because, as Ken said, they're hard to pin down. So I think so long as we include it in the opening line at the very beginning of the article (again, as I did on Sing Along), we should be covered. —Scott (talk) 17:21, July 28, 2010 (UTC)
- We do have some dates, especially for more recent re-releases -- and, obviously, if someone comes along with a collection of videos that they can grab dates from, then we want them to have a place to put them. I'd rather include the dates that we have, to show that we want people to fill in the missing dates. -- Danny (talk) 09:59, July 29, 2010 (UTC)
On a related topic, were we still going to put the title cards of some of the videos in the upper right hand corner? We've talked about it before, and it seems like we were doing it on a case by case basis, depending on the layout of the page. -- Ken (talk) 04:42, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
- That sounded like a good idea in theory, but it turns out a lot of them are boring. I'm not opposed to including them, but maybe the top of the article isn't the best place. —Scott (talk) 05:11, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I think title cards are important for TV shows and movies, but they tend not to put a lot of work into the title cards for video releases. I think they should be further down the page if we include them at all -- and for some, like the example Scott linked to, it's not even worth including them. -- Danny (talk) 09:15, July 30, 2010 (UTC)
Elmo Japanese cover
Anybody recognize this cover? It looks like it's in the Kids' Guide to Life series, but the other Japan titles I've found have English on the cover. It seems to translate to something like "Making Friends with Elmo". Are we missing this one in the US section? -- Ken (talk) 07:44, March 11, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'll take it off... also taking off the talk box. Ken has figured out pretty much everything we need to know now. -- Danny (talk) 21:57, January 25, 2010 (UTC)
Discussion moved from the talk page of Play-Along Games & Songs
This is something which may affect other video pages, but I thought I'd start here. Now that we're adding tables to videos, which in most cases replace the earlier text lists and descriptions (although a text lead-in is still a good idea), it can affect structure. I noticed in the history that Enrique added the table structure in August (but with image placeholders for all the frame scenes). In October, Danny moved the release gallery above the table. However, that looked very messy to me, so I fixed it (before I checked the history to see the development). So it might be a good idea to decide what we want to preference in these cases, the table or the release gallery. I'm also thinking, if we still want an image at the top (outside of the table), that an approach similar to the Sesame episodes themselves, using either the title card or a smaller version of the first video release cover (since those are too large to fit with such a format) would work. Thoughts? -- Andrew Leal (talk) 20:25, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
- We've talked about it before, but I can't remember where I saw it. Danny had preferred putting the video boxes above the table. We also couldn't decide whether to put the title card or the first video box in the top corner. I think it was depending on whether there was a full chart, or just a list of the contents. Anyway, I remember talking about this before, but I can't remember if we ever finished discussing it. -- Ken (talk) 21:27, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Maybe take it on a case by case basis? In this case, there are five home video releases noted, two with "no images," and at two per row so it takes up a lot of space without being all that aesthetic. At the same time the table would look nicer with fewer "no images." Otherwise, if we're going to push the table down, a) there should be more of a lead-in than one sentence (which I added, so whichever way we go, it's easier for readers to get a pat summary of the video contents) and a heading above the table so they know it's even there (which in the previous format required further scrolling and was just plunked in after the gallery) and/or b) I think just use the standard gallery format, not two per row, since it just adds space without really improving the page's looks. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 21:41, January 9, 2010 (UTC)
- The only old discussion I could find is here, from October, where Danny said if the cover is at the top there should be more text, and the only issue was a single cover as a representative image, not a messy incomplete gallery. I'll ask him to weigh in on this when he can. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 01:03, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, here's my thought -- I think we need the cover at the top of the page. This page is kind of like if you did Sesame Street: A Celebration - 40 Years of Life on the Street without the book cover at the top. Lots of detailed info, lots of images... but if you don't show the cover, then it doesn't make sense.
- I just edited Play-Along Games & Songs to show a different way of doing things. I think it would look nice if we put the most recent cover at the top right. If a video is reissued, then the top right pic is replaced with the latest cover. That way, we have a guide to the videos that people are most likely to recognize. The average reader will know the latest cover from the video store -- the VHS cover from 1986 is of historical interest, but it's not the video that people are "looking for" when they're reading the page.
- Since that's causing spacing problems with the video infobox, then we should take the infobox out. We've moved that kind of info to the releases gallery anyway -- doesn't make much sense to have the original release info separate from everything else.
- Now that that info is moved to the bottom, I've taken the interesting facts and put them into the article text -- the publisher and year for the first release, first DVD release, and the most recent release.
- The collector in me wants to put the first edition on top, and then have all reissues on the bottom, like the records. But then I'm thinking that videos are kind of a different thing from the records. While the record/tape/CD library has been completely redone several times, and only The Muppet Alphabet Album has been continuously in print since 1971, the videos have been reissued constantly, and we're still dealing with getting ready for the forthcoming Warner releases. So I can understand putting the current box on top, since it looks like almost everything in the entire library is going to have a new box now. -- Ken (talk) 03:19, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
- Since we're not going to put an infobox at the top, can we put a little current box cover picture down in the cover gallery, so we can put the catalog number under it? That way, casual viewers can see the current box at the top, and then the video collector will have all US and foreign releases, years, distributors and catalog numbers together. -- Ken (talk) 03:23, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, absolutely! That was what I meant -- I wasn't clear enough. The pic at the top is basically an illustration for reader identification, and then the releases gallery at the bottom is the detailed, completist info. I'm glad you're okay with this design... It'll probably continue to change and improve over time, but that's wikis for ya. -- Danny (talk) 18:30, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, it was the release gallery at the top that bothered me as ugly and odd. It still needs more leader text to work (or else make the cover smaller than our standard 300px, since it's too tall) but just a single cover image, that I've been on board with more or less all the time. It was just sticking the release gallery up that looked sloppy. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 18:41, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
I added some more text to the top of Play-Along Games & Songs, and shrunk the pic a little bit. I like what this is becoming -- this feels more like a readable page now than anything we've had before. -- Danny (talk) 02:14, January 19, 2010 (UTC)
- I like it! I think more text at the top would like, like it does on Sesame Street: 25 Wonderful Years. - Oscarfan 02:27, January 19, 2010 (UTC)
Sesame DVD mystery
Warner Home Video has the new license for Sesame videos starting in 2010, and they're hitting the ground running! From what I can tell on Amazon and the WBshop.com, they're churning out re-releases of pretty much everything in the back catalog.
- I know I've seen some of those covers in stores before Warner Bros. got the license. --Minor muppetz 15:22, January 17, 2010 (UTC)
- One possibility is that Genius Products did a terrible job of distributing these older titles, and didn't release cover shots to Amazon. That might make sense; that's why Sesame dropped Genius after a couple years and went to the more competent Warner Bros... -- Danny (talk) 19:17, January 17, 2010 (UTC)
- Hey, Danny! That's what I was saying last night. It seems like I hardly saw any Genius reissues the whole time they had the license. I saw all of the new ones, but hardly any titles that would have been rereleased with new distributor information. My B&N still has a bunch of Sony titles from before the switch to Genius, and so either they never got new copies, or they weren't going to order again until the Sony ones sold out. Usually during a distributor change, they either return old stock, or they put transitional stickers on them. I remember when the CD's switched from Sony to Koch, B&N sent them all back, because one week they were there, and then they weren't.
- I know that the All-Star Alphabet and Learning About Letter ones are Genius releases (I saw them on the Sesame Street online store awhile ago). - Oscarfan 00:57, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
- I recall seeing copies of the 25th anniversary release (and also a Genius rerelease of Christmas Eve on Sesame Street, not pictured here) back in 2008, and being surprised when I saw them. Aside from the Sesame Street Double Features it seems as if Genius didn' bother to make any announcements of these releases. A while ago I posted something about them here. --Minor muppetz 14:14, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
- Things are getting even more interesting. I'm starting to find some other titles (besides Let's Play Music) with Warner bar codes and catalog numbers on some websites. I'll have to start checking stores again before Feb. 2, because I think some titles did get reissued on Jan. 5. More details as I find them! -- Ken (talk) 06:57, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
- BREAKING NEWS: Wal-Mart has Sesame Street: 40 Years of Sunny Days in a new Warner edition. Exact same cover picture, same bar code, same catalog number, but no little hardcover book, and the WB shield is on the spine of the box, and the spine of each disc case. And the new Warner copyright warning is on the bottom of the box. So I guess this is how they're going to do it for all the ones that used to be on Genius once they stop using the transition sticker, and start pressing them themselves. I'm glad they're keeping this one in print, since it only came out 2 months ago! -- Ken (talk) 03:01, January 24, 2010 (UTC)
The Warner release does come with the book, it's just not a hardcover one (it's a little booklet). I'm not sure whether to change the date or not, but my copy is the Warner one and I got it in 2009 via Amazon. - Oscarfan 03:04, January 25, 2010 (UTC)
- Well, here's the technicality. The press release says that the license is effective 1/1/10, and the transaction stickers on some items now in stores say "(C) 2010 Warner Home Video". However, the Warner edition of 40 Years actually has, "(C) 2009 Sesame Workshop" on the box, which is what the Genius edition says. So I guess they had them printed in advance for the first of the year. I would make all confirmed Warner reissues 2010 to keep it simple. -- Ken (talk) 04:31, January 25, 2010 (UTC)
- I may be a little late with this, but I was just at B&N and they had a whole bunch of SS DVDs with the re-issue covers. I didn't check for dates, but they were all Genius releases, except for "Count it Higher." - Oscarfan 01:33, June 19, 2010 (UTC)
As you may know, a new format for these videos was introduced, where we put the videos in a table format to follow like the Sesame Street episode pages. However, there's several problems with how he pages themselves should be organized. In some pages (like We All Sing Together), the title card and info template are at the top, like the Sesame Street episode pages and looks good that way, but then the info in the template is repeated later down he page in order for the original video artwork to be shown. While on other pages (like Sesame Street: A Musical Celebration), the table is put in a "Segments" heading; it works well there because it has a lengthy opening paragraph, whereas videos like Sing Yourself Silly! have a mere few sentences and no image. Does anyone have a good idea on how to make a consistent model, and yet still looks nice? I kind of like this edit to Sing Yourself Silly, where the info box isn't covering the table, but a gallery. However, I feel the segments should come before the releases. What you do think? - Oscarfan 19:35, October 3, 2009 (UTC)
- That's a good question... If you want the video cover to be at the top, then it could work if there was also some text at the top of the page. Maybe a description of the special? -- Danny (talk) 20:04, October 3, 2009 (UTC)
- Frankly, I would rather have the cover in the gallery, with the video's title card on the top. - Oscarfan 20:17, October 3, 2009 (UTC)
- This has been bugging me for a while, but I'm not sure what to do. And I know we've talked about it a few times. It seems like we have specials like Christmas Eve on Sesame Street that don't have clips, and then most everything else is clips with new linking material. I know we have separate pages for the actual broadcast of things like Christmas Eve and the video release for it, but now I'm wondering if we should. On Don't Eat the Pictures, we just have a page about the broadcast, and then boxes at the bottom. So really, Christmas Eve should be the same way. I'm also starting to think that all clip videos should have the title card at the top, and then a chart, and then all releases, so they're all together. -- Ken (talk) 20:45, October 3, 2009 (UTC)
- Whatever we decide on, I think it's important to have the video cover and/or cover gallery above the fold. Most people who aren't us identify those products from that artwork and not the title card or a table of screenshots from songs. For example, not a lot of folks are going to bother to scroll all the way to the bottom of We All Sing Together to verify that this is indeed the video they're looking for. We have a lot of pages with the cover gallery buried at the bottom where I think they need to be moved up. —Scott (talk) 05:05, October 5, 2009 (UTC)
- Personally, I'd think title cards at top work best for pages that are about a production which later went to video (Christmas Eve, Don't Eat the Pictures), with a nice screengrab below, and except for Don't Eat, we usually have the most cover variants for those anyway. If it was made as a video, though, the cover makes more sense than the title card and is more attractive. Most of the specials released on video won't change format anyway since most are full narratives, not clip shows or skits, with a few exceptions (mostly recent). -- Andrew Leal (talk) 06:13, October 9, 2009 (UTC)
- I am a big advocate for the title card as the top identifying picture. The cover art doesn't always represent the actual video production, just what the product is being marketed as. So the title card is an important indicator of what it's actually called. My suggestion was to have the cover gallery above the fold, but what I should have been more clear in saying is that I really mean they should be above the sketch table and certainly never buried at the bottom of the page as they are on some of our videos pages. —Scott (talk) 01:31, October 15, 2009 (UTC)