@markcurrancavan said:

This show has a 14+ disney rating in europe and it could be argued this is not a "kids" cartoon and outside of this specific rule.

Based on the Cambridge dictionnary, at 16, we are still a kid.

@superboy97 said:

@markcurrancavan said:

This show has a 14+ disney rating in europe and it could be argued this is not a "kids" cartoon and outside of this specific rule.

Based on the Cambridge dictionnary, at 16, we are still a kid.

Ok, however, Wiki states this for TV-14, from the FCC.

This program contains material that many parents would find unsuitable for children under 14 years of age. Programs contain material that parents or adult guardians may find unsuitable for children under the age of 14. The FCC warns that "parents are cautioned to exercise some care in monitoring this program and are cautioned against letting children under the age of 14 watch unattended". Programs with this rating contain intensely suggestive dialogue, strong coarse language, intense sexual situations or intense violence.

I think it's fair to say, this animated show falls outside the definition of "children's cartoon".

@LloydWLDavis said:

@superboy97 said:

@markcurrancavan said:

This show has a 14+ disney rating in europe and it could be argued this is not a "kids" cartoon and outside of this specific rule.

Based on the Cambridge dictionnary, at 16, we are still a kid.

Ok, however, Wiki states this for TV-14, from the FCC.

This confirm that the kid rule apply, as we are still kids after 14 years old.

@superboy97 said:

@LloydWLDavis said:

@superboy97 said:

@markcurrancavan said:

This show has a 14+ disney rating in europe and it could be argued this is not a "kids" cartoon and outside of this specific rule.

Based on the Cambridge dictionnary, at 16, we are still a kid.

Ok, however, Wiki states this for TV-14, from the FCC.

This confirm that the kid rule apply, as we are still kids after 14 years old.

A show with "sexual content", "strong course language" and "intense violence" can hardly be called kid friendly now, can it?

@superboy97 said:

@LloydWLDavis said:

@superboy97 said:

@markcurrancavan said:

This show has a 14+ disney rating in europe and it could be argued this is not a "kids" cartoon and outside of this specific rule.

Based on the Cambridge dictionnary, at 16, we are still a kid.

Ok, however, Wiki states this for TV-14, from the FCC.

This confirm that the kid rule apply, as we are still kids after 14 years old.

Fair enough, decision made. Best to just move on and close this thread.

@superboy97 said:

@markcurrancavan said:

This show has a 14+ disney rating in europe and it could be argued this is not a "kids" cartoon and outside of this specific rule.

Based on the Cambridge dictionnary, at 16, we are still a kid.

How could we possibly argue with this incredible logic, this show is exactly the same as Thomas the Tank Engine.

@LloydWLDavis said:

A show with "sexual content", "strong course language" and "intense violence" can hardly be called kid friendly now, can it?

This depend of the age of the kid. It is not classified as above 18.

@superboy97 said:

@LloydWLDavis said:

A show with "sexual content", "strong course language" and "intense violence" can hardly be called kid friendly now, can it?

This depend of the age of the kid. It is not classified as above 18.

The point is, a show with this rating is not suitable for all "kids". It is more mature. Hence our argument that this is not the same as children's cartoons.

What I don't understand is that the very first line of the 'Epsiodes rules' clearly states "Episodes should be added exactly as they first aired on the original network (title, date, order, season)."

Yes, further down it does state "The main reason for splitting the segments is that segments are often released individually and/or paired with a different segment in subsequent releases." However the example given is a traditional network show airing on Disney XD. For X-Men 97 the "Network" is Disney+, so first of all this can't really be compared to a normal TV Network. As we have established, with the way Disney+ works it can't be treated the same as network cartoon. This show will not be changed in subsequent 'releases' - Motendo/LifeDeath Part 1 will always be episode 4 of a 10 episode season.

So why is the first rule being broken based on a sub-rule that you are trying to wrap wround content that it shouldn't apply to based on the definitions of "kids". Just because a show is animated does not mean it is a "kids cartoon". Stop hiding behind this sub rule, admit you made a mistake and just follow the main rule.

I do not think anyone will win this one. They're being clear. Their interpretation for kid is anything that isn't adult, basically excluding TV MA and R rating. @markcurrancavan said it best. The rules are the rules until someone changes the rules. Best to let it rest and move on. Switch your source to the TVDb for this show and let it rest folks.

@blackzw said:

I do not think anyone will win this one. They're being clear. Their interpretation for kid is anything that isn't adult, basically excluding TV MA and R rating. @markcurrancavan said it best. The rules are the rules until someone changes the rules. Best to let it rest and move on. Switch your source to the TVDb for this show and let it rest folks.

Or just rename the episode from S01E04 to S01E04-E05 if your using plex or some other media software which uses tmdb metadata.

Thing is they're happy to have users add content, but not to have logical conversations about content and how it is input. This makes no sense.

I really don't understand... the rule on children's series doesn't make sense already, and I don't understand why we waste time on whether X-Men 97 is for children or not.. . we do not care ! The broadcast on Disney+ should be respected. Any other remarks are irrelevant here.

Will that be corrected? It is really annoying

Seriously mods, go watch (the real) episode 5 and tell us this is a “kids cartoon”…