Talk:Serenity (Firefly episode)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, which collaborates on television programs and related subjects on Wikipedia.

	This Firefly-related article is within the scope of WikiProject Firefly, a collaborative effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the TV series Firefly, its spin-offs, and all things related to the Firefly 'verse. You can help! Visit the project page or discuss an article at the project talk-page.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.)
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the Project's importance scale.

 

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Serenity (Firefly episode) article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

Contents 1 Problems with article content 2 Bad Spoilers 3 The Tube 4 Comments from an outside reader

[edit] Problems with article content

After I started doing some text tweaking, I began to think that there are two significant problems with the article as it currently stands:

1. I'm not sure we're serving the encyclopedia nature of Wikipedia by including a blow-by-blow account of everything that happens in a TV episode.
2. Many characters and terms are introduced without any explanation. This is fine for a TV show that unfolds its mysteries over time, but again does not suit an encyclopedia article, which is supposed to inform people not intimately familiar with the subject.

Because it's difficult to get other Wikipedians to tolerate TV-episode articles, we should try to ensure that what we produce is much like one would find in a TV-show reference book, not a tell-all fan work. I'll try to put my money where my mouth is in the next few weeks and start creating and revising episode articles along these lines. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 21:53, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

did you guys decide anything? I also thought it strange to give it as a blow-by-blow instead of a summary/review/analysisplange 04:40, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bad Spoilers

The comment about Dobson under the heading "Trivia" is a major spoiler for the comic books, not the episode. It should have additional spoiler warnings, if it belongs here at all.

I removed some of the spoiler information about Dobson, which didn't seem necessary to make a connection to other parts of the Firefly/Serenity story. I hope this brings this trivia item down to an "acceptable" level of spoilerhood. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 23:41, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Tube

The following text was recently added to an item in the Foreshadowing section:

In the original rough-cut of the episode (known in Browncoat circles as "The Tube") Mal actually orders Wash to attempt to locate a compression coil.

Do we have a source from which any of this information can be verified? ~ Jeff Q (talk) 01:41, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comments from an outside reader

My suggestions:

• I would pare the plot down a bit more if you can. It might be difficult. At least combine some of the shorter paragraphs. I would combine the Synopsis and Plot sections.
• Trivia sections are more or less universally frowned upon in FAC, because long lists are not considered "brilliant prose". There's some useful out-of-universe information here that could be better organized. The "Special guests" part could be worked into "Production details" and expanded, for example. Is there anything notable about how they got involved?
• I'd look for more information on critical reception of this episode.
• Either expand "Arc significance" (if you can) or merge it with Synopsis/Plot.
• How long is the DVD commentary? If it's as long as the episode, then you should try to provide a more precise location where the comment is made; otherwise, it's hard to go back and verify the comment (I speak from experience here). I've grown to like the idea of splitting Notes (for individual footnoted points) and References (larger works). See Donkey Kong (arcade game) for a FA that splits notes and references. You'd have to adapt a bit for DVD commentary, but the idea is to make it easy for the reader to verify content. — TKD::Talk 23:17, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback! I'll tackle some more of your suggestions shortly, but I did go ahead and move Special Guests to Production Details (good idea!) and moved Foreshadowing under Arc significance as that seemed to make sense. I also was able to move several of the trivia items into the article body itself, and what was left over I remade into "Cultural and literary allusions" plange 00:06, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

For marking where it says something in the documentary, should we use a time stamp, or is simply stating the scene when it is said sufficient? plange 00:14, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

If the scene is identified officially (or if the episode is split into tracks), that should probably be sufficient, IMO. — TKD::Talk 01:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)