The good article status of this article is being reassessed by the community to determine whether the article meets the good article criteria. Please add comments to the reassessment page.

^{Date: 17:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC)}

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Arrested Development article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4: 90 days

Arrested Development is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

Arrested Development has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 5, 2005.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 28, 2005	Featured article candidate	Promoted
October 9, 2009	Featured article review	Demoted
December 25, 2011	Good article nominee	Not listed
August 1, 2012	Peer review	Reviewed
October 6, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed
November 1, 2012	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
Current status: Former featured article, current good article

California: Los Angeles / Southern California Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Greater Los Angeles portal This article is supported by Los Angeles area task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by Southern California task force.

Comedy Mid‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by TBrandley, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on September 20, 2012.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Television: Arrested Development Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Arrested Development task force (assessed as Top-importance).

United States: Television Low‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Television portal This article is supported by American television task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 2 times. The weeks in which this happened:

Season 5 News?[edit]

There^[1] have^[2] been^[3] reports from Netflix execs about a potential season 5. Is this wiki-worthy?

References

Requested move 5 April 2019[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved the first one, the second one is not moved. Seems that WP:DIFFCAPS is acceptable. (closed by non-admin page mover) B dash (talk) 09:00, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

– This was last suggested at Talk:arrested development seven years ago that I can see, and I think it's past time to check again. Looking at the traffic report ([[1]], it's abundantly clear that the show is the primary topic for the term. Hovering around 150 thousand views/month compared to under 20,000 for the other articles combined. Safrolic (talk) 05:30, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Generally, contemporary media should not displace something like this psychology term just because it is "popular". Popularity ebbs and flows, but the significant of the term in a scientific basis will always remain. --Masem (t) 05:41, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Note that I would support only moving the TV series, per WP:DIFFCAPS. We do not need the parenthetical disambiguation if there are only 2 topics where "arrested development" could lead, and instead the use of hatnotes to distinguish between the two. --Masem (t) 17:35, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - It makes no sense to displace the mundane psychological term as that is certainly primary topic for long-term significance, since it is the namesake/inspiration for all the other proper name entries. -- Netoholic @ 06:15, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination, page views, the fact that the "scientific term" is quite young and confused (see its page), and arguably the classic and ongoing television series itself will hold the long-term significance. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:57, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support first per Randy Kryn, the dominance of page views is hard to ignore. Ambivalent on the second, there's an argument for leaving it per WP:DIFFCAPS but the term does seem to have a rather muddled history. PC78 (talk) 12:47, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - the TV is obviously named after the topic. As I've stated in numerous cases such as this, readers shouldn't need to guess that our naming style with regards to capitalization differs from nearly all other places an average reader will encounter. --Gonnym (talk) 17:24, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support first, oppose second per WP:TWODABS and WP:DIFFCAPS. Hatnotes will suffice. Note that "named after" or "inspiration" is not a criterion for deciding primarytopic. Dohn joe (talk) 17:49, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Long-term significance is a primary topic criterion, and there are many things that can demonstrate that something has long-term significance such as being the namesake or inspiration for something else. -- Netoholic @ 18:09, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody's arguing that the show was not named after the psychological term, but I think it's been surpassed even in long-term significance. Boston was named after Boston, Lincolnshire, but it still surpassed the original. The show is considered to be one of the best TV shows, ever, and it's unlikely its cultural significance is going to go away any time soon. Even if you think the psychological concept will be significant over the long term (I assume we're talking decades here at minimum), WP:PRIMARYTOPIC says it's a judgement call whether usage or long-term significance determines the primary topic, in the event of conflict. Safrolic (talk) 18:27, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is one of those shows whose reputation grew after it was cancelled and has grown ever since. It was quite ahead of its time, and may be still, and the appreciation of its quickness and the depth of its writing and acting are edging the show into the all-time classic level. This reputation, along with page views, qualifies for primary. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:01, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support first, oppose second per WP:TWODABS and WP:DIFFCAPS. Someone typing in "Arrested Development" almost certainly is seeking the show. I'm fine with Arrested development remaining where it is, however. Nohomersryan (talk) 20:13, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support TV series page move as the primary topic per above, oppose second per above. Hatnotes should suffice. -- Wikipedical (talk) 20:21, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Masem. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:53, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support both. WP:DIFFCAPS says The general approach is that whatever readers might type in the search box, they are guided as swiftly as possible to the topic they might reasonably be expected to be looking for. In this specific case, disambiguating with just capital letters would not best serve that goal. Reader (and editor) interest in the TV show currently far outweighs interest in the psychological term; most people who search for "arrested development" will be looking for the TV show; most people do not bother with capitalization when doing internet searches. Therefore, in order to best serve our readers, a search for "arrested development" should default to the TV show. (As for the idea that the psychological term might ultimately have more long term significance, well, we're not setting this in stone! We can always shift the titles around again in the future if the need arises.) WanderingWanda (they/them) (t/c) 02:12, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Although more neutral on the titling of Arrested development, the title of the TV series should be Arrested Development per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. --Quiz shows 03:11, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Certainly worth moving the first. WP:DIFFCAPS seems suitible for the psychology example. The TV show is clearly the primary topic, however. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:07, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support first, oppose second DIFFCAPS and a hatnote provide the needed distinctions here.--Yaksar (let's chat) 01:30, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support first, oppose second per WP:DIFFCAPS. A hatnote is sufficient to disambiguate. Calidum 03:52, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

No longer on Netflix?[edit]

Very confused that Arrested Development, both old and Netflix Original series, no longer appears on Netflix. Even more confused that no news outlets seem to have picked up on this. Anyone know what's going on? U-Mos (talk) 23:51, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's still on Netflix in Canada. What region are you in? Drovethrughosts (talk) 23:59, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting - I'm in New Zealand and also checked the UK and US; it's absent in all of these regions. U-Mos (talk) 06:21, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the US, and still seems to be available via web [2]. --Masem (t) 06:42, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, just a title page and the ability to set a reminder if it's ever re-added. U-Mos (talk) 06:51, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There's certainly no sign of the series being removed from Netflix in Dec or Jan's removal list. --Masem (t) 06:54, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And yet it's vanished... and I noticed this months ago, just forgot again until now. U-Mos (talk) 06:58, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Season Three Typo/Misspelling[edit]

The synopsis for season 3 incorrectly identifies Gob's yacht as "The C Word". The Boat's name is pictured in the episode and is called "The Seaward", which intentionally sounds like "The C Word" as innuendo in the following line delivered by Lucile Bluth who believes that the name is reffering to her. Rowan101010 (talk) 20:07, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I checked and I was wrong.

The boat is called the Seaward until Gob renames it in the same episode. Rowan101010 (talk) 20:20, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

okay so there are two boats. (Seaward Season 2, C-word season 3) This topic suggestion can be deleted. Apologies if i can do that myself I cannot see how. Rowan101010 (talk) 20:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Arrested Development (TV series" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

The redirect Arrested Development (TV series has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 13 § Arrested Development (TV series until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 05:54, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment[edit]

Arrested Development

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result pending

Seasons four and five, which premiered after this became a GA, are not meaningfully covered Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delist. Fails criterion 5b "it addresses the main aspects of the topic". Not in the worst shape though; it could probably be kept as a GA with the right attention. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:11, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is the only section you have a problem with seasons four and five? If so I could probably throw together a plot summary within the next few days. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 05:06, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just the plot summary. A lot of the article is frozen in time. Production is about the production of seasons 1-3 with one paragraph tacked on to the end just mentioning that seasons 4 and 5 exist. Characters and reception don't acknowledge that they exist at all. Right now the article looks like it was written in 2012 and then a few season 4/5 details were added on after the fact, which is exactly what happened. If I were reviewing the article at GAN, I would also take issue with the "controversies" section, giving undue coverage to certain events during production solely because they are controversies. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:50, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]