Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Firefly

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Firefly page.

Use this TALK PAGE to discuss the format and arrangement of the main Project page. Go here if you are wanting to discuss policy or strategy

Contents

[edit] Revised Episode format proposal

Not so much different, but more specific to Firefly.

  1. A general description of what the episode/serial is and when it was first broadcast.
  2. A teaser Synopsis with no spoiler content.
  3. A more fully detailed Plot with spoiler warning.
  4. Trivia
    1. "Standard" trivia information
    2. Guest cast, with the name of the character followed by an em dash (— or —) followed by the name of the actor
    3. Allusions to earlier episodes
    4. Foreshadowing
  5. References
  6. External links, to include a link to the BBC on-line cast list.

Just a few tweaks; the allusions/foreshadowing sections work well as children under the Trivia heading, in my opinion. I stuck the guest cast section in there as well, since rarely is it significant enough to warrant its own section (for example, Objects in Space only has a single guest star). EVula 19:43, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I've made the change. Everyone, definitely help with things like this as I just put up a skeleton. Some of you are more experienced Wikipedians than I am :-) -plange 20:07, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Happy to help. I've tagged a few articles with the project template, and tweaked a few other things. When I have some time, I'll see what I can do about improving elsewhere. EVula 20:45, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Character format

Okay, I just put up something, just so we'd have something to work against in coming up with what we'd like to see the article format appear. This is NOT me saying it must be this way, so please, if you have changes or alternatives, let's discuss :-) -plange 00:14, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I think it's pretty good. My only concern would be "Motivations" and "Goals". Unless they redo the series through the eyes of River, we're not likely to be able to poke around inside the heads of characters, and so those sections are liable to be full of original research. The two characters who spring immediately to mind are Book and Jayne. What ARE Book's motivations, especially when the hints to his backstory are taken into account. Why DOES he stay on the ship? With Jayne, is he REALLY as mercenary as he likes people to think? Fans and people who watch the series can come to their own conclusions, and a lot of them'll be different- but none are supported by canon, and so nearly anything put in those categories will be or tend towards OR. Barnas 11:02, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
yikes, yep, you're right, and I definitely don't want to encourage OR as we already have a problem with that....
Expanding on the idea of "Conflicts", with whom or what does the character get along especially well? I would suggest a section such as "relations to other characters" or somesuch which describes significant or consistent trends in relationships between characters. On another note, the tag {{spoiler-about|n}}, which was brought in for the needs of WP:Buffy, might be helpful for people who don't immediately realize that they will be reading spoilers for the series, the comic, and the movie. (For instance, knowing that Jayne is a member of the crew in the film is a pretty good indicator that he doesn't get sucked out the bay doors at the end of Ariel.) - Che Nuevara: Join the Revolution 11:37, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] new image

I uploaded the image [Image:Firefly-layout.png] and rationaled it as fair use. If anyone wants to take a look and comment on it, please do so. Thanks. - Che Nuevara: Join the Revolution 12:44, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Sounds great to me, though this isn't my forte ;-) plange 16:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citing sources

I've updated the examples of {{cite web}} and {{cite book}} to reflect the following ideas:

  • Specificity is important in book sources. Without page numbers or at least a chapter name, readers must hunt through the entire work to find the relevant information. There should be no excuse not to include page numbers for Firefly citations because the three (so far) canonical books have only 1 edition each, so there can be no confusion about the numbering. (If we're good about page numbers, we probably don't need the chapter names.)
  • Adding some space around the wiki template markup makes it MUCH easier to spot references and decipher their content. This is critical because the new ref format embeds the entire footnote in the text. (There is currently a bug in the book and web templates that requires the first parameter be on the same line as the template name, but the rest may be space-indented safely, and the closing ref tag is placed unindented on its own line to visually mark the end of the reference, and, not incidentally, prevent errors when adding or deleting optional parameters.)

I didn't tweak the {{cite podcast}}, {{cite episode}}, and {{cite visual}} examples because I haven't personally tested them, and some of them seem to be somewhat fragile and inflexible. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 13:13, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Jeff! One tip too for using page numbers. If you're citing from the same book but from multiple pages throughout, it can get quite cumbersome to have to keep putting in the full cite book template each time, so you can do a simple markup in the ref tag and then do the cite book template citation in the references section, like I did here: CSS Virginia II -- You would put your <references /> in the Notes area and the full book in the References section. SOOO much easier to cite things that way and cleaner when editing. And I didn't just make this up as a way to do this, it's the way the MILHIST project recommends their articles be done for these cases. plange 16:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Good point. That is a well-established mechanism, even in print publications. Another way, which avoids having 2 sections, is to provide a full citation for the first reference to the work, then to use the abbreviated version (e.g., "Finding Serenity, pp. 3-4") for further citations. This is also a very common system in publishing. (We should probably use abbreviated titles rather than author surnames, given the ambiguity of "Whedon" in this situation.) ~ Jeff Q (talk) 16:46, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Categorisation work

Hi. I've done some refactoring work on your Project's categories and templates today (along with several other WikiProjects). I'm confident you'll find that the new organisation a big improvement. For more information and a rationale please see what I've written at Wikipedia:WikiProject/Best_practices#Categorisation or drop me a line on my talk page.

If you're not yet assessing articles for Wikipedia 1.0 and using Mathbot, you might also find Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index of subjects and it's talk page very useful. --kingboyk 17:21, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks kingboyk, yep, we're already participating in 1.0 and are listed on that page - Mathbot's been very helpful! plange 17:55, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 :) Yes, I know you are. I copy and pasted this message, should have been more careful! Anyrode, thanks for the thanks! --kingboyk 18:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Date format

"Full dates (including month, date, and year) should be linked to allow preference-based formatting. Any of the following formats will accomplish this, and will be displayed exactly the same to any reader, based on their preferences:"

This is actually only partially true -- if the user hasn't specified a preferred date format under his preferences, then they will show up differently. For that reason, any single article needs to be consistent in its date formatting to avoid disorienting readers. If the particular format bothers the reader, then he can go change his prefs. - Che Nuevara: Join the Revolution 16:45, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spoiler tags up for deletion

Thought you guys might be interested in weighing in on this debate-- someone is requesting the removal of spoiler tags. -plange 18:59, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Talk page templates and assessment scale

Hi, I'm working on creating a WikiProject for Pink Floyd (I haven't gone public with it yet). I love the talk page template and assessment scale you guys use at this Wikiproject. I took a quick look at the template and I can see it's got coding it in way beyond my abilities to comprehend. Would you mind if I adapted it for my project? I'll give you guys full credit in the code, of course. - dharmabum 02:53, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Be my guest, though I also got help from others who are credited in there, so if you could carry that over too, that'd be great. You're free too to copy anything we're doing in our Project structure-wise as well! If you do the assessment scale thing, make sure you make all the categories that are needed so that the bot can pick it up.... Good luck! plange 03:55, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Shiny. ;) Thanks, and I'll certainly carry over your credit to the military history and Beatles projects. I'm finding the complexities of creating these more code-level aspects of a good WikiProject a little daunting but challenging and fun. - dharmabum 04:19, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree but it's so worth it when you figure it out :-) plange 14:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Onion.

The Onion has noted that the Firefly article is one of the most detailed on Wikipedia, rivaling the American Inderpendance article. ;) -- Jeandré, 2006-08-02t20:06z

OMG, that was a riot! Cracked me up! Thanks for the notification! plange 20:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Companion (Firefly) has been created

BEHOLD! And then edit the hell out of it (or assess it, at least). :) Runa27 22:11, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anyone going to Dragon*Con?

I'll be there this weekend - was going to see if any of you might be going? plange 03:04, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] created a new template

{{Firefly Character}}

I can be thanked in pies. ;) --KrossTalk 23:48, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar userbox

Just an FYI, I've created a userbox for people who are given a Browncoat Award. You can find it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Firefly/Award userbox. EVula 06:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Project Directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:

  • User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
  • User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
  • User:Badbilltucker/Science directory

and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 21:59, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now moved the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 13:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of Firefly curse words

I think this page should be renamed to something like "List of Firefly curse words and slang", or something to that degree so we can add shiny, verse, sly, etc... -Xornok 14:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Or Firefly dialog? That way we can get away from a list and write some prose about the dialog, etc.? --plange 16:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Trying to write an article about the dialogue would inevitably lead to OR. But I agree that slang and such should go in the article. - Che Nuevara 21:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Zoe vs. Zoë

Hi, folks. If you look at Talk:Zoe Washburne#What's in a name? you'll see that Nalvage (talk • contribs) has kindly provided proof that the shooting scripts spell our favorite first mate's name as "Zoe", not "Zoë". I've moved the page accordingly, and am about to embark on a quest of correcting the references in Firefly articles — however, it's likely that I'll miss a few. Should any brave knights care to join me on this adventure of diaeresis removal, all are welcome! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 16:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nathan Jubal Fillion Early

Nathan Fillion is a distant relative of Jubal Anderson Early, hence the naming of Jubal Early in "Objects in Space".

Where in the hell is this verified? I'm arguing with an anon editor about this, who promptly sent me to the two people's articles (which didn't have {{fact}} tags at the time) as evidence.

At one point, the "Objects in Space" article claimed that Joss said this in the commentary for the episode. However, in watching it to verify a different bit of trivia, I failed to hear anything about this. Is it perhaps in another episode's commentary? (My DVDs are loaned out to future browncoats, so I can't readily verify this) Is it anywhere? I'm looking to put a final nail in this coffin one way or the other. EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I do seem to remember it somewhere, I've got my set, so I'll get back to you. In the meantime, I think you're right to revert. Especially since it was stated as a fact, when, even if we find the commentary, it should only say that Fillion claims he's a descendant, and not that stating that he is, in fact, a descendant. --plange 22:57, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Ah, there's that aspect as well. I'd be perfectly happy with actual evidence that he's even done that much, to be honest; my expectations are apparently quite low. :-)
Additional information: I've consistently heard this as "Joss says..." as far as the origin of this goes; my guess is that, if it isn't in the "Objects in Space" commentary (which I'm 99% sure it isn't), it might be in the "Serenity" commentary (or any Joss-only commentaries; pretty sure that Nathan or Alan don't mention it in "War Stories"). EVula // talk // ☯ // 23:03, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
That's my thinking too (that it must be in one of those you mention) --plange 23:05, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] free-use images

I replaced the fair-use images at Nathan Fillion [1], Christina Hendricks [2], and Sean Maher [3] with free-use alternatives. I also replaced the existing free-use image at Alan Tudyk with a better one [4]. Thoughts? — pd_THOR | =/\= | 01:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/k/Wikipedia_talk%7EWikiProject_Firefly_1291.html"