Talk:The Office (U.S. TV series)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Former featured article The Office (U.S. TV series) 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.
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Archive
Archives
  1. November 2005 – March 2006: Primary topics: Image and external link discussion.
  2. March 2006 - August 2006: Primary topics: Trivia, external links, and quotations.
  3. September 2006 - August 2007: Primary topics: Selected fansites, product placement, spoilers.

Contents

[edit] Harry Potter references

There are several peculiar references to Harry Potter that keep popping up in this series. Is this a holdover from it starting as a British show? For instance in "The Convict", Prison Mike is asked what the worst thing was about prison and he answered "the dementors." In "Beach Games" Dwight named his team Gryffindor whle Jim named his Voldemort. In "Money" Jim has Dwight read Harry Potter for a bedtime story for he and Pam during their stay at Schrute farms. I'm sure there's others that I'm not thinkning of. These just seem like odd (but funny) references. I was just curious.

Those must be British references, because I've never heard of Harry Potter. Jarrettmoffatt (talk) 23:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

huh? Anyway, the Harry Potter references are mostly centered around Dwight. Enigma msg! 23:38, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Jarrettmoffatt, the Harry Potter books are a huge phenomenon worldwide. Wikipedia says: "The success of the novels has made Rowling the highest-earning novelist in history." Alpheus (talk) 06:26, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

In "The Fire", Dwight chooses a Harry Potter book as one of the books he'd take with him to a "desert island." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.230.52.101 (talk) 16:18, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Clearing out and pairing down

This page is a little too long, some things need to be take off this page and put onto the episode specific pages.

Also I would like to propose amending the "awards and nominations" section to just awards. Three Emmys, a golden globe and several writers guild awards, I think the nominations are just superfluous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.245.117.88 (talk) 05:10, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Selected Fansites"

Hello i have a new fan site that i would love to be added to the fan site section i will be updating it regularly and i will put everything the office on it. Check it out if you want i would like it added to the fansite section. http://theofficeonnbc.blogspot.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizong (talk • contribs) 18:00, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Please wait until your site becomes popular before proposing adding it to the fan sites list. Wikipedia is not for promoting your web site. The other linked-to sites have very high prominence. Office Tally and Northern Attack, for example, are cited by the actors themselves in interviews as good sources of information. -- Raymondc0 22:22, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

ok i will thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizong (talk • contribs) 02:33, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I would like to propose that http://www.jellostapler.com be added as a fansite listing. It is unique over other fan sites in that it gives content in a specific area related to the show - putting people's objects in jell-o. This is content that would not be typically found on other fan sites. It has been running over a year, gets 2 to 3 emails from fans with stuff in jell-o photos, participated in the office alliance summer scavenger hunt, and is featured on many blogs and websites. - theofficefan 67.101.255.123 03:00, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I have not seen any responses to this, so I will add to the section. If you don't think the site qualifies, please discuss. 69.249.110.81 02:16, 11 October 2007 (UTC)theofficefan
Start a discussion by creating a new section on talk page. This discussion is very old. Personally, I don't think your site is popular enough and warrants some discussion before it's added. 216.171.96.106 21:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

The bar for being a fansite worth of inclusion is pretty high. Office Tally and Northern Attack are acknowledged by the cast and crew as quality fan sites, they've gotten shout-outs from the DVD commentaries, etc. The only other fan site I can think of that falls into this category is Give Me My Remote. If you can get Jenna Fischer to mention your blog, then you'll have a better case. -- Raymondc0 22:00, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproject The Office (US)?!

I think all the office articles could benefit from a Wikiproject The Office (US). Other shows have a wikiproject like Heroes. Alot of the debating and discussion about The Office happens here, even if it doesn't pertain to this article. A Wikiproject, would allow us to make Wikipedia a great source about The Office.

If your interested just put you name here! [1] It wikiproject has been created and it is here Wikiproject The Office (US).

Separately, on an unrelated note, if you happen to find a small brass key …

YaanchSpeak!

[edit] Requested to appear on main page

Hi, seeing as the season will be starting on the 27, I requested this article to appear on the front page in late September or early October (27 was taken). Show support by voting at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests#Date requests and go here to see a preview. Try to clean-up the page as I see that it has a few tags which is not something people will want to say represents the best of Wikipedia. --thedemonhog talk • edits 23:30, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

A page does not just get granted featured article status. Some people must have worked hard for it. Even if you didn't, wouldn't you like to see it on the front page. It needs votes, so go support my date request. –thedemonhog talk • edits • box 04:39, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fairness of tone

I think the first line needs to be moved. Per WP:NPOV's fairness of tone, yes, it is true that the show has won awards, but we kind of cast a biased impression of an article if the first thing we do is talk about how great it is. That is why WP:LEAD says that "basic" information comes in the first paragraph, and that you establish the article's "impact" in the second (or later, if you have multiple) paragraph. It also doesn't help that it is biased toward Emmy's and Peabody, when there were other awards that it was nominated for, and won.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Well, if there is any award that the article should be "biased" towards for a TV show The Emmy is it. I think it sets context well to illustrate why the show is notable. Agree The Peabody reference should move.Kevin Crossman 23:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Does this belong in the Cultural References section?

The Office will feature various allusions to another branch in the city of Utica, New York during the fourth season. Here's the citation: [2]. It it a valid source?--24.59.155.203 00:10, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

It seems like a valid source, but until it is actually incorporated into the story line, I don't think there's any point in including it in the article. Keep an eye out! Yavoh 19:41, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Karen

The episode "Fun Run" does not say what her status is, only her desk is cleared out. While a logical guess would be she quit, Wikipedia needs confirmation from a source (in this case, the episode) and the episode left it unanswered as to what exactly happened to Karen. For all we know, she transferred to another branch and never told anyone else. 68.23.8.50 19:30, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dunder Mifflin name

It doesn't seem like the paragraph about the "Dunder Mifflin" name should be in the Casting section.--198.82.97.118 11:48, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Apple ostensibly over pricing

Under the online heading, the article states, "Sales of new The Office episodes on iTunes ceased at the end of Summer 2007 due to a dispute between NBC and Apple ostensibly over pricing." This leads the reader to beleive that NBC pulled the episodes due to Apple over pricing. The source states that NBC wanted to raise the price of each episode from $1.99 to $4.99 and apple was against this. This should probably be fixed.

Kuka18 15:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

There were dueling press releases between Apple and NBC over who wanted to raise prices. Neutral wording appears most prudent here. -- Raymondc0 22:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


Im fine with that if thats the case, but shouldn't the other source appear as a footnote?

Kuka18 15:41, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to add a link. -- Raymondc0 18:21, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Number of episodes

Fellows fans, It seems silly to have to update the number of episodes every week a new one airs. I'm not sure how other TV shows deal with this, but we are a special breed of TV watcher, so I'm sure we can come up with a better solution. Perhaps we could put the number of episodes at the total number including all of season 4? Your thoughts, or suggestions?--Cms479 19:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] JelloStapler.com as Selected Fan Site

I would like to propose that http://www.jellostapler.com be added as a fansite listing.

Pros - Original Content, No Other Fan Sites Concentrate on Jim's Prank (There are fan sites regarding quotes, episode reviews, fan fiction, actors, actresses).
- Has proven itself, has been up over a year, with 2 to 3 fans emailing in pictures of jello every week.
- Is part of the office alliance, coordinating things with the bigger blogs such as LITO, OfficeTally.
- Was invited to the blogger's breakfast at The Office Convention.

Responses
- "Not Popular Enough", Sure I probably don't get the amount of traffic as LITO or OfficeTally, but then again, I don't target every single keyword related to The Office. I get a steady 600 to 800 visitors a week, and dedicate fans emailing me every week.
- Also have connections with NBC Universal and their agencies discussing some promotion ideas.

Original Discussion -

I would like to propose that http://www.jellostapler.com be added as a fansite listing. It is unique over other fan sites in that it gives content in a specific area related to the show - putting people's objects in jell-o. This is content that would not be typically found on other fan sites. It has been running over a year, gets 2 to 3 emails from fans with stuff in jell-o photos, participated in the office alliance summer scavenger hunt, and is featured on many blogs and websites. - theofficefan 67.101.255.123 03:00, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I have not seen any responses to this, so I will add to the section. If you don't think the site qualifies, please discuss. 69.249.110.81 02:16, 11 October 2007 (UTC)theofficefan

Start a discussion by creating a new section on talk page. This discussion is very old. Personally, I don't think your site is popular enough and warrants some discussion before it's added. 216.171.96.106 21:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Current Discussion

I would like to propose we NOT add it, as it is not a notable site, and WP is not your advertising agency. Regards, K. Scott Bailey 04:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I actually kinda like that website. It's a little off beat and provides different content compared to the major fan site hubs that link and tag everything related to the office. If not in the selected fan sites, there should be a fan site section. I also enjoy http://mtt.just-once.net/ with it's focus on Jim and Pam on the office as well. 67.101.79.198 04:04, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Does a website need to look professional to be considered a selected fan site? This has more of a fan site feel than a professional feel. JelloStapler is listed on AOL's selected fan sites for The Office. That is how I found out about the site, and occasionally go back to see what new things in Jello people are doing! I think Any Office fans would get a kick out of this site that they wouldn't get out of any other fan sites. However, the other sections of their website isn't as strong as their main purpose (stuff in jello) 67.101.28.18 15:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links. Mrtea (talk) 20:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
And I concur with K. Scott Bailey above Mrtea (talk) 20:24, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] iTunes

No mention of how iTunes saved The Office? [3] 129.120.22.130 21:33, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Be Bold when editing! — Yavoh 17:31, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Geographical References

I'm putting this here since it was removed from the main page by 129.120.22.130. — Yavoh 22:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Dwight has on his office cabinet a bumper sticker promoting Froggy 101, a country music radio station in Scranton, and on his desk are bobble-head dolls from the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Red Barons baseball team (which has since been renamed to Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Yankees, after becoming affiliated with the New York Yankees). As a matter of fact, the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Yankees logo can be seen on the vending machine.

A bobble-head doll of former Syracuse University basketball player Gerry McNamara, who is from Scranton and attended Bishop Hannan High School, also sits on Dwight's desk. Due to his gritty play that helped lead the Orange to their first National Championship in 2003 and Scranton's relatively close proximity to Syracuse, NY, he has become a legend at both the University and a local hero in Scranton.

Other references to the geography and culture of greater Scranton include Lackawanna County, Lackawanna Coal Mining Tour, Poor Richard's Pub, Farley's, Connell Park, Carbondale, Dickson City, Lake Wallenpaupack, The Mall at Steamtown, radio station Rock 107, the Boston Market in Stroudsburg, the Montage Mountain Performing Arts Center, Bishop O'Hara High School, Dunmore High School, and the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton Penguins hockey team. Noteworthy departures from this accuracy are occasional mentions of and visits to Chili's, Hooters, and Benihana restaurants, none of which have franchises in the immediate area.

In the third season, a University of Scranton kerchief is draped over the cubicle wall behind Pam's desk.

The show has put the entire Wyoming Valley region of Northeastern Pennsylvania in a positive light. Many of the props with local ties (such as the Froggy 101 sticker prominently displayed) are sent to the producers by local companies, and thus far the producers of the show have happily obliged in including them in the show.

[edit] WP:MOS cleanup

I just did a lot of cleanup; is anyone still watching this article? Please see WP:DASH, WP:MOSDATE, WP:MOSNUM, WP:MOSLINK, WP:OVERLINK, WP:MOS#Captions and WP:UNITS. There are quite a few unformatted citations; please see WP:CITE/ES and complete the remaining blue links. More attention is needed to correcting issues with seasons, as the article frequently refers to Fall, Summer, etc. (although it shows in the USA as well as Australia, opposite seasons). Also, there were numerous external jumps to blogs within the text; please see WP:EL. Those blogs are appropriate on each actor's individual page, and external jumps belong in External links. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:09, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Good eye, SandyGeorgia - I think I'll take a look at this article and see what I can clean up (both from a MOS standpoint and simply working with the text.) Reading through it again, I worry that this article would lose FA status if sent to review. - Chardish (talk) 07:07, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inter-racial relationships in The Office

comment removed; talk pages are not internet forums. If you can find material that supports your position and should be included in the article, please do so, otherwise, the talk pages are not the place to voice opinions about the show itself. Thank you - Chardish (talk) 04:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rating

I removed the "rated TV-14" logo from the page proper, as ratings are assigned per-episode and have even been shown to change on subsequent airings. Furthermore, as a voluntarily assigned rating, the rating serves as a parental guideline and does not identifiably impact the show. - Chardish (talk) 04:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spam in The Office articles

I invite contributors to the WikiProject discussion page for a short post I made about external links in episode articles. Mrtea (talk) 20:19, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Character Listings

I'm sorry, but shouldn't the character listings be updated, or even taken out completely? For example, Ryan Howard is no longer a temporary worker, but a Vice President of Regional Sales. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xrarey (talk • contribs) 02:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

New positions are listed at Job Status Changes in the article. The character listings list the characters' original positions at the start of the series. — Yavoh 03:21, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I removed the Job Status Changes section and incorporated those changes into the season synopses. Lists of information are rarely as appropriate as integrating information into the text of the article. - Chardish (talk) 04:35, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I admire your optimism. That section was added specifically because people kept "updating" the character listing (in good faith); having a separate section helped focus the misguided efforts. We'll see if your theory works. -- Raymondc0 (talk) 06:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] International Broadcasts

I had attempted earlier to eliminate country-specific references in this section, but my action was reverted by another editor. Do we need to know why Portugal (or any other country in the world) broadcasts The Office at 4:30AM? In my humble opinion, Wikipedia is not the place for this type of detailed, nearly-random information, although general references are okay. What do you guys think? Mwlin1 (talk) 00:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the details of when each country airs The Office is not encyclopedic in nature. -- Raymondc0 (talk) 01:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blackberries and product placement

Are the blackberries in season 4 an example of product placement initiated by RIM (the blackberry company) or the sort inserted by writers a la the iPod? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.20.197.105 (talk) 10:35, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Centralized TV Episode Discussion

Over the past months, TV episodes have been redirected by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [4]. Even if you have not, other opinions are needed because this issue is affecting all TV episodes in Wikipedia. --Maniwar (talk) 03:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)


i don't like how it says "unlike many other shows" and then "unlike many other producers" right after another —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.179.32.18 (talk) 01:06, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Looking for help writing an article about the spin-offs and crossovers of this series

I am writing an article about all of the series which are in the same shared reality as this one through spin-offs and crossovers. I could use a little help expanding the article since it is currently extremely dense and a bit jumbled with some sentence structures being extremely repetitive. I would like to be able to put this article into article space soon. Any and all help in writing the article would be appreciated, even a comment or two on the talk page would help. Please give it a read through, also please do not comment here since I do not have all of the series on my watch list. - LA @ 17:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] British spelling

British English spelling is rampant in this article, especially in sections such as "Improvisation." According to Wikipedia's policies on British and American English differences, the country with which the article's subject is most closely associated should have its standards of spelling and grammar applied to the article. I'm bringing this up now because there will be complaints that The Office originated in the U.K. and British English variations should be used; however, since this article pertains to the United States version, American spelling should be the standard. Ashley {talkback} 00:44, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

It is about time some consensus was set, despite the age of this article. policy suggests that it shouldn't be changed without good reason. Sadly, there is no mid-Atlantic version of English, so I'd suggest that the status quo and common-sense should prevail, and it should stay in British English unless someone can come up with compelling reasons to take the time to change it, given that this time could be spent improving other articles. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 00:56, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Ashley is correct. I think the UK English results from UK editors adding stuff, and policy is pretty clear about what version should prevail here ... it is the American version of a British original, as steeped in American workplace conventions and foibles as the British version was steeped in British work culture. Will address this in copy edit. Daniel Case (talk) 04:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Issues from a hard-copy edit

In connection with the ongoing FAR, I printed out a copy a couple of days ago and went through it with a red pen. It did not go unused.

It shows the results of a lot of inattention paid to it since achieving FA. The little tidbits added here and there by anonymous editors, some of whom do not seem to have first-language English skills, has hurt. The article, as the FAR notes, is losing focus.

Some of the larger issues, should anyone else want to keep them in mind for future review:

  • Lots of redundant wording, particularly the use of quotes to back up an assertion that immediately preceded them, without adding much to the statement. These can and should go in the quote= arguments in the footnotes.
  • Overuse of the introductory passive voice, something we get a lot, from college/high school anons who've had to read too many textbooks and assume that style is equally good for encyclopedias.
  • Run-on sentences, another consequence of anon or driveby editors just inserting stuff into an article knowing someone else will fix it.
  • Excessive detail in the season plot summaries, as indicated by the FAR. Fixing this by applying WP:SS will do wonders.

I will be spending this coming weekend going through the article section by section to fix these. We also need to find some new references to replace the dead links. It is my hope that we could bring it up to code in time for it to run on the Main Page on April 10, when new episodes resume. Daniel Case (talk) 04:29, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

It is unlikely that this article will be today's featured article on April 10 because "Doomsday", an episode of Doctor Who, has been nominated for April 5. I recommend trying for May 15 (fourth season finale) or September 25 (fifth season premiere). –thedemonhog talk • edits 05:19, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Unsure of Today's featured article nominations... why can't this be nominated for April 10 if Doomsday is going for April 5? Mrtea (talk) 05:25, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
The WP:TFA/R community and its director Raul654 enjoy variety. The last episode TFA was South Park's "Trapped in the Closet" on March 15, and some even believe that "Doomsday" is too soon after. –thedemonhog talk • edits 06:09, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm actually beginning to think that the fourth-season finale would be better. The writing issues are easy to fix but there's quite a lot of unsourced info I'd like to keep that's going to take some time to find good info for (I'd like to have a reliable source for the Staples ad running right after Kevin rhapsodized about the glories of the shredder. A couple of blogs have mentioned it, but we can't use that).

In the meantime, I appreciate all the help we can get in keeping the gold star. Daniel Case (talk) 17:09, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Afterward

It seems that I was able to trim about 7-8K from the article (mostly from the season synopses). Always good to slim things up. I have either purged or resourced everything that was a problem, save the dead links (which I'll work on tomorrow).

Two areas need some more work, though:

  • The "improvisation" and "deleted scenes" sections are short and really don't need to be separate sections. Perhaps we could find some way to put them somewhere else? Some sort of section on production of the show?
  • We need to have separate season episode list articles for seasons 2 and (yes) 4, for consistency's sake.
The season 1 article was just promoted to featured list status, I'm about to start on 2. I'll do 4 after the season's over, and I'll probably find a time to work in "The Accountants". Mastrchf91 (t/c) 20:48, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I also am thinking of some sort of "impact" section where we could mention the political critique Graydon Carter makes that I linked below, and the show's pioneering status as one people watch as much online as on TV (it's mentioned in several other sources). This deserves more mention than it gets in this article currently, and should even be mentioned in the intro. Daniel Case (talk) 06:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

  • I think the political section is out of place. It isn't at all significant. This is just an opinion of a barely known columnist. It should be deleted as it can also be seen as offensive to some people. It is blatanly biased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.115.236.155 (talk) 20:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
  • I've reverted the deletion. The section doesn't praise or dismiss the section, it only presents it in a NPOV. The deletion you made represents a greater bias than that of the section itself. Mastrchf91 (t/c) 20:59, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. Graydon Carter is notable. Vanity Fair is notable. End of discussion (and besides, I've heard a lot of other, non-notable people make the same observation). Daniel Case (talk) 04:00, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The theme song

Can't someone create an .ogg of, say, the piano part and then the first statement of the theme? It would be so much better than having an image of the printed music (which I'm not sure is free anyway). Daniel Case (talk) 18:45, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] links for future use

Graydon Carter on the show's similarities to the Bush Administration: http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2008/02/graydon200802.

Sydney Morning Herald on how the show is the bleeding edge of a shift from watching TV on TV to watching it online: http://www.smh.com.au/news/web/profits-streaming-away-from-tv/2008/03/29/1206207482318.html

[edit] Characters

Just wondering what others thing of this. Other TV show pages have updated their character lists to deaths/vacancies of characters, and I believe that we should do the same with promotions and such. Opinions? Mastrchf91 (t/c) 16:53, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Though I don't edit on this page, I tend to agree with updating the character lists. It's been four seasons since the show started, and so I think people would be more confused if they saw the original character jobs, as opposed to what they have now. Just my opinion. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm going to go ahead and update them, then. If anyone has a disagreement, please don't only revert, discuss it here. Mastrchf91 (t/c) 21:01, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] After defeaturing

It was probably inevitable, and I think we need to address the issues raised by Collectonian in the last days of the FARC. I am working on adding sources for the writers and directors, but the awards are all completely unsourced. Someone who might know more about it than I do should put that information in there.

We really do need a lot more sources than we have. There are a hundred or so footnotes now ... I think we easily will require twice that. This article should not be allowed to sneeze without citing something.

I am looking at taking this to peer review by the end of the month once we have addressed every issue to the fullest extent possible. After that, any suggestions made in peer review will be addressed and this will be nominated for GA. Only after that can we return to FAC. Our target date is getting this on the Main Page on 9/27, the day of the US premiere of the fifth season. Daniel Case (talk) 18:43, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

It occurs to me that having all that cumulative information about directors and writers where it is now (near the top) is rather confusing. Wouldn't that be better off in the season synopses? Any thoughts? If not that's what I'll do. Daniel Case (talk) 20:46, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Difference between US and other verions.

What is the difference between the US version and the rest? Maybe someone can write it up.Xbox999 (talk) 21:23, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

  • There's already comparisons on the parent The Office article. No need to put that here. TheLetterM (talk) 21:51, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
  • You may ignore this section, this user is attempting to obfuscate a sockpuppet case by leaving a bunch of unrelated and irrelevant comments on the talk pages of American TV shows. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 22:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)