Talk:Charmed/Archive06

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

This archive page covers approximately the dates between 1 June 2006 and 29 June 2006.

Contents

2006 June discussions

Matthew

Many people have posted that a boy named Matthew, as seen in the flash-forwards, is Piper's and Leo's grandson. However, I very much doubt this and, thus, think that an edit of any mention of the Halliwell's being related to him. Here's why:

In Leo's lesson, it appoears as though he is encouraging all his students to tele-orb the book, as all the students put their hands up. He only happened to chose that boy, Matthew, at random. So, if you believe that Matthew must be related to them because he can tele-orb, I find that very unlikely. Leo himself said "Who would like to try it first?", therefore they could all tele-orb. Furthermore, considering that Leo is going grey in that scene, Matthew would be too young to be his son (if anyone was thinking that), but considering that he was nearly the same age as Piper's and Leo's granddaughter (with telekinesis) when Piper and Leo were very, very old, then Matthew would, at that time, be nearly 20 and far too old to be their grandson. If you do the Maths, their is absolutely no way Matthew can be their grandson.

In the script it said he was their oldest grandson. Zythe 20:03, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Future Daughter

Throughout the Charmed section of Wikipedia, people have written that Piper, in the future, will have a daughter named Melinda. Now, I can see so many errors with this, that I believe all information on "her daughter" should be removed or edited. It appears that she is instead Phoebe's daughter:

1) The shooting script names the young girl (who Piper gives a lunchbox to, alongside her two sons) as Melinda. According to the Offical Charmed Magazine (Issue 8), the young girl and Phoebe's daughter (seen in her premonition during "8x09 Hulkus Pockus")was/is to be called Melinda.

2) During the Season Seven episode "Witchness Protection", Phoebe (through Kira the Seer) recieves a vision of her taking home her daughter (Melinda - according to the Offical Charmed Magazine), and Piper's two sons (Wyatt and Christopher). Therefore, it seems very likely that if Phoebe is able to collect the three children from school, that Piper is able to send the three to school. It seems very likely that the writers wished to show reference to the first time we saw Melinda and how she was coming home from school with her two elder cousins.

3)We can see that if Wyatt and Melinda were to go to school together, they would be very close. We can observe this in "Imaginary Fiends":

FUTURE (GOOD) WYATT: Aunt Phoebe ... I think you should hold onto that
imaginary friend's paper of yours.
PHOEBE: Why?
FUTURE (GOOD) WYATT: For my little cousin.

4)During the flash-forward to when we see Piper handing 'Melinda' a bag or a lunchbox, the voice-over says: "Not just to [Paige's] own children, or to mine {here we see Piper handing Wyatt a lunchbox}, or to Phoebe's {Piper is just about to give a lunchbox or bag to Melinda}..."

5)The actress who plays Melinda is the same one who plays one of Phoebe's daughters earlier on the flash-forwards (where she is with her sister and Billie), as well as in "Hulkus Pocus" where she plays Phoebe's daughter, who, in the episode, is named Melinda (according to the Offical Charmed Magazine) and is now again (in "Forever Charmed") named Melinda (according to the shooting script). The actress is Sierra Paris.

6)Why would Piper, during her voice-over, miss out a vital and extremely important aspect of her future as having another child. Moreover, if she did have a daughter, the importance would have been president considering that when she went to the future in 1999, she had a daughter, and when she was pregnant, she expected on having a daughter ("Prudence Melinda Halliwell"), therefore mentioning the birth of a daughter she had long expected would have been very important.

7)The shooting script names the little girl as Melinda (as I have abovementioned). When Piper was pregant with Wyatt, and expecting a daughter, she was planning to name her/him Prudence Melinda Halliwell. Therefore, if she did have a daughter should she not have Pruence as her first name, apposed to Melinda?

8)During all the scenes with Wyatt and Chris, neither of them mention having a sister. If the writers had indeed decided to give Piper a daughter, would Wyatt and Chris have not mentioned it (even in a humorous way). We know that Wyatt is not able to easily hide the future ("Uncle Coop?" - Forever Charmed, "Before or after [Chris] swallowed the marble?" - Imaginary Fiends), so would he not have said something along the lines of: "I guess 'Prudence/Prue/Melinda' hasn't been born yet...oops!". Furthermore, when we view the forward-flash to when Wyatt and Chris are making a potion, or to when we view the photograph of the two of them on the staircase, wouldn't their sister (if they really had one) help them make a potion or appear in the family photograph with them?

9)When Piper and Leo are elderly, they will have at least five grandchildren (or, a total of five grandchildren AND great-nephews/neices), that is two boys and three girls (including the granddaughter with telekinesis). This ratio is identical to the naumber of children both Piper and Phoebe have (two sons - Wyatt and Chris - and three daughters - Melinda and her sisters). This number of grandchildren may have been purposely chosen to mirror this.

Therefore, all the detailed research I have conducted leads me to believe that the girl seen going to school with Wyatt and Chris is in fact Phoebe's eldest, and prophecised daughter - Melinda (as is portrayed by Sierra Paris ("Hulkus Pocus", "Forever Charmed"), Sierra Parks ("Witchness Protection") and Adair Tishler ("The Jung and the Restless" -- playing a dream version of what Phoebe wants her daughter to look like)). Therefore, I believe we need an edit of all sources that say that Piper has a dughter named Melinda (including the Piper Halliwell Biography, the Piper Halliwell Factbox, the 'Forever Charmed' Summary, the Melinda Halliwell-Wyatt biography, etc.)

--Danny DeSio 11:03, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, some thoughts to this.
In the 8.22 flashforward where we see Phoebe heading off presumably to the hospital (tummy and all), we see two girls, who are not more than one year apart. We also know Phoebe lives downtown with Coop, not close to the Manor. Thus it is strengthened why we see Billie as a nanny to the two kids, and not, say, Piper. When we see Piper sending the kids off, we can perhaps say from the setting that the kids are being sent off to school, so it is morning. Why would Piper take care of only one of Phoebe's children? We've seen Phoebe's two daughters, not much from each other in terms of age.
I would also have to add that the message of the flashforwards, in accordance with the power of three handed down to the next generation, was that everyone, in the end, had three children.
As for Wyatt and Chris, I would have to attribute the 'missing sister' problem to the decision between strengthening the notion that everyone had three kids (something emphasized quite clearly in the flashforwards), or tying up the storyline between Chris and Wyatt, something already mentioned in 7.20 but not strong enough, there was a need to see Chris and Wyatt side by side as they had their own personal conflict which had to be seen as resolved. Their relationship is the one reflected in the ending flashforward and the photo, and it would complicate matters to put a girl next to them, first of all, one more adult character to an already tight budget, but even more implrtantly, we see the photo and the Wyatt & Chris making a potion scene for four seconds. Putting a yet unknown character in there has to take several more seconds to be understandable for the audience, as well as raising confusin: is this a sister or a girlfriend or someone else? To tidy that up you need one more, even if short, plotline, and at least half a minute. Given the insane number of plotlines already covered in the finale, I think it would be a wise decision to drop a further one.
Finally, from a structural point of view: in a general, highly condensed summary of the future which is not more than two or three minutes, would the show's creators really create a structure this complex? Based on American television series standards and on the professionality (ie. they are not amateur filmmakers) of the team that is putting the story together, would it not be more probable that we are seeing image sequences of the futures of three families? The physical settings are distinct -- The Manor for Piper and Leo, the Condo for Phoebe and Coop, the Police Station for Paige and Henry (as there was no 'Henry's apartment' set built), and all of the characters are distinct. Would it happen that one character jumps a setting? If this were so, it would be a very large writing mistake.
Just my two cents. AdamDobay 12:13, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I understand that the addition of an adult sister would have been confusing and that we needed to view the good relationship between Wyatt and Chris. Yet, how does one explain the fact that Piper failed to mention that she had a daughter, when Phoebe and Paige both clearly highlighted their children. Furthermore, why would she, a daughter, make such a brief appearence with no real introduction? Why would the same actress be used to portray her? Why would she be given the same name as Phoebe's daughter? Why isn't she named after the original name chosen by Piper - Prudence? Why wasn't she in any of the photographs on the wall (especially considering how many baby photos there were of Wyatt and Chris), and if your answer consists of the confusion, is it not more confusing to have a girl hanging out with Wyatt and Chris (in the lunchbox scene) than in family photo? It seems as though, if she is a daughter, she was completely ignored by Piper and ignored by the family when it came to having her (baby?) photo's on the wall and inored by her brothers. It seems more likely that she is Phoebe's daughter and that everyone is blowing this out of proportion...
Furthermore, the reason Billie was babysitting Phoebe's daughters was due to the fact that they want somewhere to show that Billie is in their future, not because she is prefered to Piper or Paige. Additionally, wouldn't Phoebe (as she is about to go into labour in that shot), want her sisters with her while giving birth, instead of them babysitting.
Piper never said she had a daughter, no matter how much we may have wanted Melinda Halliwell, or how ever much we would have liked the Charmed Ones to each have three children, therefore she never really had one (that, or she has abadonment issues - a mother would never forget her daughter the way Piper did if she really did have one). --Danny DeSio 12:38, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
We don't know if she wasn't in any photograph on the wall. There are a lot of pictures on the wall which we are not shown. On the first shot when old Leo and Piper go up the stairs we have the picture of Grams in the middle and the picture of Patty & Victor in the top right corner. In the bottom right corner it is safe to assume that there is a photo of Piper and Leo holding Wyatt (from a scene in 5.20). What's on the rest of the pictures? On the top middle picture, above Grams, there is a large photo of a baby and we have no idea who that is, we have five photos in a frame in the top left corner, the only recognisabe from which is the picture with Paige's twin girls as they have the same pink outfit they had in the police scene. Furthermore, there are even additional pictures we do not get to see in the episode itself but are there. Another fan outcry was the fact that we, in a similar manner, do not see a picture of Prue, not of Shannen Doherty (not applicable due to copyright reasons) and not even of a kid Prue.
I'm not sure about the names, I mean Melinda and Prudence are quite popular in the family, and as we have seen all throughout the series, the future changes every time and we are not filled in on details like what Piper would like to call her daughter and whether that changed.
From all the things I said above I still assume that it is Piper's kid mostly becaiuse I think that if Piper sent Phoebe's kids off to school, it would be pointless to have only one of Phoebe's kids there considering the age difference I mentioned above, it just complicates matters too much and I think the writers wouldn't have done that. Of course I may be wrong so I say that we should wait with this until the next Charmed Magazine issue which, from what I remember to have been written as the contents of the next issue, may deal with clearing up the future of the story. If this problem is not cleared there we should get back to this but until that we should, I think, not alter all the pages of the Charmed article-dom. AdamDobay 13:02, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I still believe that the little girl is Phoebe's daughter. However, your idea to wait until the next magazine issue sounds the safest option so far. --Danny DeSio 13:09, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
The script specifically said she was Piper's third daughter.
There we go. Thanks for clearing that up Zythe. AdamDobay 20:46, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Actually, the original script had Piper saying that she would have the daughter she always wanted. However, that particular line was chosen to be scrapped by the writers. Furthermore, they added an addition scene with adult Wyatt and Chris making a potion, while Piper said something along the lines of: "...the time when our children could take over [making potions/fighing demons] so that I could...open the resturaunt I always wanted to...". Therefore, a daughter was originally written in, however, she was then deleted and an additional scene of Wyatt and Chris was added with Piper clarifying that they are her only children and that they would carry on the Halliwell legacy. The script was specifically changed. --Danny DeSio 21:14, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
I do not see, in the final episode, a clarification that Piper had no additional children. There may be an _absence_ of a daughter (although as I said before I think the lunchbox scene is meant to show that she indeed had one), but I have yet to see an actual sentence that _emphasizes_ that she had no further children. AdamDobay 22:25, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
It was Phoebe's daughter (probably her oldest). Because when Phoebe has that vision it shows Wyatt, Chris, and the girl (phoebe's daughter) coming out of school, and phoebe is talking to her child about the avatars.
Plus, if piper and leo were meant to have another kid (esepecially the girl piper saw in the future) piper would have mentioned it when she was talking. There are also a lot of other things that do not add up piper and leo having a daughter. They just had Wyatt and Chris. How could it be Pipers? It's the same kid who played Phoebe's and, plus, Piper never mentions having another one. I think that would be alot more important to know than her opening a restaurant. She had been waiting for years for that kid. And for those who say that each sister should have three children: Paige wouldn't have even had three if she didn't get twins, so Phoebe would have been the only one. Having the twins is a fluke. Plus, there are four sisters (including Prue), so why should this whole 3 thing only happen to last three Charmed Ones? Plus, Danny DeSio is right, the script was changed and they did add the part with adult Wyatt and adult Chris, while Piper said: "when our children could take over". Their daughter would have been included here, but the writers decided that Leo and Piper wouldn't have one. Janice10:44, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
It has finally been confirmed. The WB (through their "wpix New York" website), have written a full review for the episode "Forever Charmed". In it, the WB write: "Piper happily helped take care of everyone's kids and finally opened a restaurant, while Chris and Wyatt prepared to take over the family demon-fighting business." We can, therefore, take the "Piper happily helped take care of everyone's kids" as a reference to the now-so-called 'lunchbox' scene, and the "while Chris and Wyatt prepared to take over the family demon-fighting business", as a hint that they are the two heirs of Piper's magical legacy (apposed to Wyatt, Chris AND a daughter). Thus, I believe we should correct all articles which claim that Melinda will be Piper's daughter. Here is a link to the website. --Danny DeSio 22:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
That doesn't really confirm anything either way. —Mira 23:00, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
That is not an official statement, that's someone from the WB's New York division watching the episode and typing it in (and while we're at that, TheWB had messed up even official plot summaries during the sweeps period, so they're not final word, the crew and writers are). And, I still do not understand why Piper would send only ONE of Phoebe's then two kids to school, please someone provide me with a good reason for that. I still say we wait for the creators' word on this. AdamDobay 23:06, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Firstly, one of Phoebes daughters may go to school with Wyatt and Chris, while the other goes to another school. That way, when Phoebe goes to send one daughter to school, she drops the other one off with Piper for her to take her to school with her two sons. Secondly, if the other daughter had already been given the lunchbox and was already waiting outside for her sister and cousins OR the other daughter may have been late (and so not recieved her lunchbox yet). Thirdly, Phoebe's other daughter may have been ill on that particular day, or had a reason to be away from school (eg, a school trip for her year/class).
Another idea I have is that the script says that the daughter is six years old. However if this is inaccurate, or due to a continuity error, and Phoebe's daughter was five, then she would be going to school, while her sister, only a year or two younger, would not have started school yet. CharmedOne 12:06, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Just to be sure, I have now rewatched the ending from tape. Phoebe has two kids shown, NEITHER OF WHICH being the same as the one Piper sends off to school. I can take pictures if you really want to see that those kids don't match up. (And before anyone says it's Phoebe's then unborn daughter, it doesn't add up in age as Wyatt is now 3, Phoebe's kids are at least 5 when Phoebe goes to the hospital, meaning when Phoebe's youngest goes to school Wyatt will be at least 14, which is not the age of the Wyatt shown in the lunchbox scene.)
The narration, to go back to one of the original arguments, has Piper say "or to mine [children]" exactly when the scene FADES IN to Piper sending the kids off to school. When she continues the sentence with "or to Phoebe's" she says that before she gives the lunchbox to CHRIS, not the girl. So this argument doesn't stand either.
The argument from Phoebe's future vision also doesn't stand, because as we have seen in Charmed no future is set, ever. Which means that there can be no speculation made from one of Phoebe's visions as the future has changed many times since that. This goes for the actress as well, it is not an obligation for the crew to recast every child actor to the same role (as we have seen Rebecca Balding as Aunt Jackie in 1.07 before she appeared as Elise and also 2.21's War was the same as 5.22's lead Titan).
Finally, at the end of the episode, as I have pointed out earlier, we see a condensed general future, not nitpicks from erratic instances. We see three different GENERAL scenarios to see what GENERALLY happens in the future for each of the characters. We see Phoebe's family, Paige's family and Piper's family. There are two kids at Phoebe's with Phoebe pregnant, three kids at Paige's and there are three children sent off to school by Piper.
To sum up, checking with the original episode reveals that the argument that it is not Piper's daughter does not work not only because of the narration not matching the argument but because Phoebe's shown children are physically different from the child in the scene with Piper. AdamDobay 18:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
In response to CharmedOne's comment, I have to say that suggesting that "Phoebe's other daughter may have been ill on that particular day" really sounds like grasping at straws. —Mira 06:31, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

On Fox?

Who erased the paragraph about the Fox renewing the series for two more years? Maelwys? Actually who wrote it? I can't find it anywhere else on the web. It's not on the offical Fox web site.

I erased it because I looked around at all the Charmed fansites, the WB website and the Fox website, and couldn't find a single bit of supporting evidence that it was actually true. And there were no citations within that paragraph either. So it looked to me a lot like vandalism, and I got rid of it. If somebody wants to put it back, along with sources proving that it's true, be my guest... I just haven't yet found any such sources. --Maelwys 01:46, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately (?) that paragraph was just fantasizing on what the writer wanted to happen. It closely rhymed what UPN did to Buffy when it was cancelled, but considering that Holly is retiring to spend time with her baby, Rose has spent the last half year getting connections with big Hollywood names, Alyssa has received over thirty movie scripts where she had been considered a part, and Brian is probably going back to independent filming. Not to mention Brad Kern who wants to take at least half a year off. Furthermore, no one buys shows for an instant three television movies and two seasons, you don't do that in today's television. So, overall, a joke. AdamDobay 09:54, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
so sad. i'm gonna miss this show so much

Cameos

I think it would be neat to have a single list of all "famous" cameos from each season. The idea occurred to me in Season 7 when we suddenly saw Nick Lachey, John de Lancie (he was Q in Star Trek:TNG), and James Avery from Fresh Prince of Bel-Air. -- jclauzet Jun. 14, 22:21:25 UTC

And Charisma Carpenter, the actor from Sex and the City (who played Dex Lawson), Billy Zane, Alicia Keys, Janice Dickinson and more...--Danny DeSio 22:22, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for the additions :). I was trying to remember old cameos and was hard pressed to think of any, but, alas, Coolio! I forget which season it was (2 or 3?) - he was a Lazarus demon, someone probably knows which episode offhand, otherwise I'll look it up. Can anyone else think of more? jclauzet Jun. 19, 03:14:46 UTC
Category:Charmed actors may be helpful for you. I know next to nothing of movie stars and the like, so I'm afraid I'm not much help. —Mira 03:29, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Coolio was in 4.15 - Marry-Go-Round. There were a lot of cameos from Twin Peaks actors, look in that article for my list of which episode they were in. AdamDobay 13:33, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Don't forget the "Chin Master" himself, Bruce Campbell in 4x22: Witch Way Now? --Joe Christl 19:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Syndication

As it is mentioned in the Feature article nomination page, the Syndication section takes up too much of the article. I've started to put it in a table format but my browser closed halfway and I am now frustrated so I won't start over, but instead share my three proposed formats, with a few examples:

Country Channels airing (seasons aired) Comments
Argentina Sony Entertainment Television (1-7) Subtitled; new episodes air primetime, reruns shown on weekdays.
Australia Channel 10 (1-7), TV1 (1-4) Season 8 purchased, not yet aired.
...
Hungary TV2 (1-7) Dubbed; reruns air weekly. Title is Bűbájos boszorkák (Charming witches)
Etc.

Or, alternatively, one with a column set aside for title changes, as there are many.

Country Channels airing (seasons aired) Title change Comments
Argentina Sony Entertainment Television (1-7) Subtitled; new episodes air primetime, reruns shown on weekdays.
Australia Channel 10 (1-7), TV1 (1-4) Season 8 purchased, not yet aired.
...
Hungary TV2 (1-7) Bűbájos boszorkák (Charming witches) Dubbed; reruns air weekly.
Etc.

Or we could also put all the language stuff into one column, I think that makes it more structured.

Country Channels airing (seasons aired) Language Comments
Argentina Sony Entertainment Television (1-7) English with subtitles New episodes air primetime, reruns shown on weekdays.
Australia Channel 10 (1-7), TV1 (1-4) English Season 8 purchased, not yet aired.
...
Hungary TV2 (1-7) Dubbed in Hungarian, with the title Bűbájos boszorkák (Charming witches) Reruns of Season 3 air weekly.
Etc.

I personally like the third version. If you like the idea, pick one and then we can continue from there. AdamDobay 07:27, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

This is a fantastic idea, however, it is difficult to choose which option is the best. I like #1 because of it's simplicity and total flexibility. #2 seems overindulgent, since an alt title can more easily be stuck in the notes section. #3 would normally be the best choice, but right now we have little definite data on which broadcasters use what. At this juncture, I'll nominate #1, and begin work (in my namespace, not in the article) this evening. When finished, I'll post the link and invite comment.   --   Huntster (Talk • Contribs • Email) 18:03, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Okay, first test run is finished (User:Huntster/WS/Charmed). Give me some feedback on this layout, let me know of changes that need to be made, and I'll complete it.   --   Huntster (Talk • Contribs • Email) 03:43, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
I think #3 looks brilliant. It's simple, to the point and has information in a relevant and easy-to-read format. Furthermore, the layout is also great - simple and to-the-point. Great idea! --Danny DeSio 22:26, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

New

I've added Template:Infobox Charmed group and Template:Infobox Charmed Species to the templates directory, so pages like The Triad (Charmed) can be updated. I've already done Whitelighter, Darklighter, The Elders (Charmed) and Warlock (Charmed). Zythe 14:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Do you think you could make one for use on articles like Book of Shadows (Charmed)? I'm bad at working with templates, or I'd do it myself. —Mira 19:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
I'll do "Charmed artifact" template tomorrow for energy ball, darklighter arrow, Book of Shadows, The Hollow etc. :) Zythe 00:13, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Great! Thanks for all your work. :) —Mira 01:46, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
I did Template:Infobox Charmed Artifact and modified Book of Shadows (Charmed), but only with a brief conversion from the original. I think someone needs to further modify the content of the box. Also, The Hollow (Charmed) and The Nexus (Charmed) need doing.

Consideration for a Page Two

After noting the objections given on the Featured Article page, it seems a good idea might be to move the non-show related material to a Page Two. This P2 would include all Syndication and DVD data (oh, and lets be cheesy and have a P3 that's only about the club...ahem, nm). Result would be a cleaner Page One that would focus entirely on the series itself, thus beginning to satisfy the objections listed.   --   Huntster (Talk • Contribs • Email) 03:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Something vaguely like this, perhaps? —Mira 02:07, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, that's generally what I was thinking of, though our work to create tables for this data looks better than raw text, imo. Also, my thoughts were that at the top of each page, there would be a link series, something like Page 1 | Page 2 . I know I recently saw an article with such a setup, so I'll attempt to find it again. Shall we get some concensus on this idea then? I admit I'm new'ish, so don't know if there are procedures for creating new pages in articles....   --   Huntster (Talk • Contribs • Email) 02:20, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I think that the article could just be created, if there's a problem/objection it can always be merged back in. However, I would use Template:Main rather than a "page one, page two" format. —Mira 02:34, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I just went ahead and copied the stuff over. The new article is Charmed broadcasters and DVD releases. If someone can think up a better title, go ahead and move it. —Mira 02:38, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I think this way there is a chance for an AfD on that article. :/ AdamDobay 13:33, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
While possible, wouldn't WP:SIZE indicate that this would be acceptable, given that total file size had grown to appx 35kB? Not to mention the various calls given at the FAC subpage to clean up the main article of extraneous material. The main page should be limited to information directly pertaining to the show...characters, actors, plotlines, etc; and other data can go on this page. However, I'm still wondering if a subpage wouldn't be safer than an entirely new article, aka "Charmed/Multimedia" (btw, still looking for feedback on the broadcasters table...see section above :)   --   Huntster (Talk • Contribs • Email) 17:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Subpages are actually not allowed (see WP:SP). And I think this page should be safe enough from AFD, the West Wing version doesn't appear to have ever been brought there. —Mira 02:25, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Aha, I suppose I managed to skip that section when reading that page before. Thanks for pointing that out. Explains why I can no longer find the page I was originally thinking of...probably was remade. Also, would IMDB be a reasonable source (noticed your 'fact' insertion as for when the girls became producers, and found on IMDB a date of 2002 as being when they were made such). — Huntster «Talk • Contribs • Email» 04:12, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
I actually meant to put the {{fact}} where the article is discussing the reasons why they were made producers. I'll move that to a better spot. However, I don't think sourcing the other part is a bad thing. Please go ahead and add the reference. —Mira 04:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
RE: Producers - I just read an interview with either Brad Kern or one of the actors, that stated the girls had become producers as part of their 5th season contract. In other words, after starring in the show for 5 seasons, they automatically became producers. And although being a producer didn't garner them any additional money, they did get allot more say on certain things. Damned if I can't find it now!! --Joe Christl 18:16, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
As someone working in the film and television industry, I have to correct you on that Z-vap. With a show like this you renew your contract every year until it expires (which it did after eight years). Every year you may apply changes to your contract in details like how much money you get for an episode, etc. This is where it was included that Holly and Alyssa will become producers, AFTER being asked to be producers. In Hollywood (nor any other film industry), you don't just become a producer by yourself, as that involves a lot of work you may not be qualified for. AdamDobay 21:52, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
I wasn't clear earlier. I believe what the intent of the speaker was trying to say, in the article, is once they've starred in their 5th season with the show, they were offered producer status. It was a mistake on my part in typing "automatically became producers". Mind you, within the article, this is just ten or so words strung into one sentence. But it IS how I interpreted the statement. I also figured it was the practice the WB took with the Charmed set, but who knows. --Joe Christl 22:55, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
I see what you mean, I wasn't aware that was actually in the article already. But what I don't get is why is that in the middle of "Billing Order". It's perfectly unrelated. I do not know where to fit that in the current article, though, either. AdamDobay 23:30, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. I ammended the produer part after reading the rumor mill that someone tossed in there, but later thought to myself that the Producer stuff didn't really fit in the "Billing Order" category at all. It probably should be moved somewhere else; perhaps when we get around to restructuring the page somewhat (possibly with pages branching off of the main one, ala Alias, using {{main}} tags and summaries) --Joe Christl 02:45, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

EW EW EWWWWWWW

Eww, I hate the short character bios. They're fuzzy and warm and it's like reading a fanbase. They should be a lot simpler, and clearer, and less... warma and sickly. Someone should condense all the stuff about how every character was the bestest nicest person ever, and someone needs to completely rewrite the Paige bit, so it's a lot more bare (she has her own article after all) and not so much a recount of the 5 years Paige was on the show. Sorry if I sound bitchy, but it doesn't seem at all encylopaedic. Zythe 23:09, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

They were never intended to be perfected, finished bios. More a starting off point to be refined further and further, such is the nature of Wikipedia.
I agree the Paige one is a tad long, though. Binthemix 00:17, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

List of the Charmed Ones deaths AFD

This article has been listed at AFD. Please join the discussion. —Mira 00:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Someone moved it to June 27th's list. Link edited. ···Q Huntster (T) • @ • (C) 02:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/h/a/Talk%7ECharmed_Archive06_dc22.html"