Talk:The Imperfects

Television 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.

Clauses

In November 2022, the series was canceled after one season. The comma before "after" is not needed, per MOS:COMMA. Revirvlkodlaku, please see Extended Rules for Using Commas. There are no commas before "after" on the reliable source explaining commas and the examples. However, don't put a comma after the main clause when a dependent (subordinate) clause follows it (except for cases of extreme contrast). — YoungForever^(talk) 05:54, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That seems correct, per the guide you link, as well as MOS:COMMA, which advises that "Modern[e] writing uses fewer commas". I think it could be written either way, but scans better with just one comma in the sentence. So I've removed the comma. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 11:19, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The comma sets of a nonrestrictive adverbial phrase, as explained here: Commas with adverbial phrases. I think it should stay. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:15, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a nonrestrictive clause in that sense. If the sentence said "the show, which had beem running for one year, was canceled" then you'd be right. But as it is, it's simply a dependent clause, as mentioned by YoungForever above, which should not have a comma, particularly as there's already one in the sentence and it's bloated with commas. Also, as mentioned on your talk page, you've broken the 3RR rule and you need to self revert your most recent edit. — Amakuru (talk) 17:30, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The "after one season" is a dependent clause follows the main clause in this case. — YoungForever^(talk) 18:56, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I don't know what your credentials are, but I've had this verified by a certified copy editor with decades of experience, and she seems to think my position is correct, so unless you can clearly demonstrate that it is not, I don't see why the comma shouldn't be there. Also, two commas is hardly a case of comma bloat, in my opinion. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 01:42, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are not a hired Wikipedia copyeditor. You currently do not have the consensus to add the comma. FYI, consensus is not unanimity. I have already proved my point in which you refused to get the point. — YoungForever^(talk) 19:50, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the rule that states that someone has to be a hired copy editor in order to perform copy edits on Wikipedia? You edit pages based on your areas of interest and expertise, and I do the same. Are you a hired Wikipedia film/television writer? Please, only make points that are logical and support your position. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 23:50, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can claimed you are a professional copy editor so, therefore, you are always right no matter what. Yet, you do not have the consensus nor reliable sources to back up your position. Also, if an adverbial clause is at the back of a sentence, you do not need a comma before it. The comma is only needed if an adverbial clause is at the beginning of a sentence. — YoungForever^(talk) 00:48, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, a professional copy editor is much more likely to be correct when it comes to points of grammar than someone who only has superficial knowledge of the field. This applies to any discipline, obviously. Also, I'm not simply claiming to be right; I demonstrated it by providing an example and by corroborating my point with another editor, one who has much more experience than the two of us put together, likely. Lastly, I provided a CMOS rule to back up my point. How is that not a reliable source?! Do you even know what CMOS is? I have to say, based on the arguments you're making, the way you are presenting them, and your overall attitude (remember that time you asked me to "get off your talk page" after I politely asked you not to be rude and make accusations of bad faith?), your credibility is on shaky ground here. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 05:23, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know what CMOS is. Yet, you are twisting CMOS words aka WP:SYNTH. Based on the reliable sources and the examples provided, it is a restrictive adverbial clause. Here is another reliable source directly from MLA official website: Restrictive and Nonrestrictive Modifiers and Clauses and Phrases. Again, you do not have the consensus to add the comma and consensus is not unanimity. — YoungForever^(talk) 18:42, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not twisting anything, stop making baseless accusations. I insist that it is a nonrestrictive adverbial clause, and more than one professional copy editor has confirmed this to me. If that is not sufficient for you, then I don't know how else I can convince you. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 22:28, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your "insistence" and the WP:OR opinion of a copy editor friend are irrelevant here. What matters on WP is consensus, which so far is 2:1 against you, with yourself the only voice arguing for a comma here. Just to add further evidence to the above, I've found multiple instances of reliable sources including similar constructs without commas, such as:

“Roadies,” Showtime’s behind-the-scenes music drama from Cameron Crowe, has been canceled after one season (the New York Times)
... Swingtown and FlashForward, were both cancelled after one season (BBC)
It was not, and was canceled after one season (CNN)
The Nat King Cole Show, which broke through these images, was canceled after one season because it could find no sponsor (academic journal article)

All in all, there is no evidence that a comma is desirable or required here, and with just one voice arguing for it this discussion appears to have run its course. I have removed the comma. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 15:16, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]