Talk:Charmed/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
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.

DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.

This archive page covers approximately the dates between 02 Jan 2006 and 22 Jan 2006.

Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.

Please add new archivals to Talk:Charmed/Archive04. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.) Thank you. AdamDobay AdamDobay 09:18, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Contents

2006 January discussions

I've thought I'll open this heading for general changes in the article to keep it more organized than it is. AdamDobay 23:16, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

External links section

I have edited the External links section, removing a number of links to non-official websites some of which were put up because it's "super" or "large". Having visited at least a few dozen of such websites, I think that only official sites should be listed here from now on, because there are larger and smaller Charmed websites on the internet and there is no consensus as to which would be better or worse. Thus I think that visitors to this article should only be pointed to official websites. AdamDobay 17:28, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

I wonder if we should bring out to visible status what I had put in HTML comment about posting other links than official websites. (By the way I'm still around but I have my exam period now which lessens my time for working on the 'pedia.) AdamDobay 15:14, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Removing unsupported claims

  • I've removed the references to Buffy the Vampire Slayer in the last section, as the phrase "Oh my Goddess" was not invented by the show Charmed but is a general exclamation, especially for those (like Willow) who are (fictional or non-fictional) Goddess-believers, and thus the phrase is not taken from there. Furthermore, the capability of getting to know things about the future isn't something unique that only the creators of Charmed thought up, and there are absolutely no similarities between the concept of Phoebe's premonitions and the dreaming of the next day as carried out by Tru in Tru calling. Not to mention that Cordelia's power is again, entirely different from that of Phoebe, and even if they were similar it would not be very wise to draw the conclusion that Joss Whedon got it from Charmed as there is nothing to support that. AdamDobay 23:17, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Removed, among others, a claim that Hecate may be the mother of Cole. I do not know where this hypothesis came from, but apart from the fact that it was never even hinted, it is impossible as there were even flashbacks of Cole's mother, who is clearly not Hecate. AdamDobay 00:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Removed the text "Charmed is confirmed until 11th season". There is no confirmation from any official source for this, especially from The WB. In itself a pick-up beyond one season with a show running for more than seven years is highly improbable, it is even rare in case of new shows. On this basis I have also removed speculation on Season 7 DVD release. AdamDobay 21:27, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Bio condensing

  • Can someone condense the last paragraph in Piper's bio thing (about Leo and how their love will be tested), it's a (confusing) summary of a few episodes (I think), and is about the same length as the summary for 4 seasons previously! I would do it, but I've not seen season 8 (which may be why it's confusing to me, although language seems a bit off too), but it seems too detailed? Also reverted some changes re Cole and Barbas, were poorly written imo Sadisticality 12:56, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I've been wanting to do that but I've been sort of mesmerised with the completely irrelevant, unacademic content that gets uploaded every day. So much for an entry on a show with many unprofessional fans. AdamDobay 17:18, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I've corrected Piper's story for the eighth season as well. I wonder if all the character bio's should be removed to their respective pages, as well as the lists of minor characters. The article is still extremely long.
  • I agree wholeheartedly, I've wanted to do that for a while though there seemed to be some resistance to the idea up above. I'd already started the process by moving the spells off to their own page, but would love to see the same happen for the characters. For the characters, all that needs to be on the main page is something like. "Phoebe Halliwell is played by Alyssa Milano. Pheobe is the youngest of the original 3 sisters, and her powers have included premonition and levitation. Because her powers are generally passive, she's also learned how to be a capable fighter." Basically, just a brief introduction, and the rest of the details can go on the characters own page. Maelwys 17:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I agree with you both about moving the bio's, would cut down article length, and probably (just from a quick look at Phoebe's bio compared to her info on the main page) improve the other articles, at the moment it just looks like someone's written a sentence about what happened to her in every episode nearly. Sadisticality 20:23, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Things to do-discussion

  • I've reverted to the version before the infobox was made into garbled code on the page. I also removed the double spoiler tag in the beginning. AdamDobay 22:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
In reply to Maelwys and Sadisticality, I think the first thing to do would be to move the whole evil characters sub-section (that seems to be the largest) to List of Charmed evil beings, though first that would have to be sorted out, at least grouped into more and less important evil characters, as it is quite a mess. I have no energy to do that now, but if anyone could start synchronizing the two pages, it would be much help.
Also, I propose the "Main enemies per season" bit to be removed, as it's not more than trying very hard to prove the existence of an overall story system and also to say that Charmed is better than Buffy. Rodriguez and the Titans for example only appeared in two episodes each. The only enemies that would actually fit the category for prominently being in the show for more than half a story-arch (which is six to twelve episodes) would be Rex & Hannah, the Triad, Belthazor, The Source, Gideon, the Avatars and Zankou. That's seven out of fourteen, there goes the theory that there are two main enemies per season. :)
I would also like to propose some kind of policy for this page and the whole Charmed category now we are at that. It is no good that on these pages, which are all extremely long, everyone adds 5k of info about their favourite episode, character, or demon regardless of their importance. Can we put the tag out for the time being that says "Before adding, consult the talk page"? AdamDobay 22:57, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree with removing the "Main enemies per season" bit, they could be mentioned just in the List of Charmed evil beings, and also in the Charmed Season Summaries if someone were to add to the summaries. I would happily do that if someone would buy me all of the DVD's, however until then, I definitely don't remember what happened well enough to summarise seasons! Also some of the enemies are definitely over info'd, the paragraph on vampires (appeared in 2 episodes) is about as long as the paragraph on the Source (a recurring theme). But I agree with your proposals. Sadisticality 23:31, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I'll also agree to removing the "Main Enemies per season" stuff. I'd prefer to sort them by in-show status, as opposed to "meta-show" status. So having one section for "Evil Masterminds" and another for "Henchmen" would perhaps make a lot more sense (though even that is somewhat random) Maelwys 00:41, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
I think a plausible solution would be to sort the importance of evil characters by two factors: amount of presence in the show (circa number of episodes) and long-term impact on the show's world or in the characters. That way, random monsters who appeared once or did one thing that had temporary impact (like changing a character into something, which reverted by the end of the episode) wouldn't have an importance, while a demon who only had two episodes but killed a major character (ie. Shax who killed Prue) would be in the main list. This may also be a good organizational logic for good beings. I can help give a list of major beings based on this system if you like and then you (or someone) can sort the actual paragraphs into place. AdamDobay 01:04, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Not to boast, really, but as I'm one of the editors of one of largest Charmed websites in Europe, as an occupational hazard I have quite an in-depth knowledge on most information about the show, so once I have much time, I can do season summaries. I'm planning to write those to the website in question so I'll just go and translate them to English when I do. AdamDobay 00:20, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • As promised, I moved enemies to List of Charmed evil beings, did the basic categorization, and also written the main enemies per season bit properly. Duplicate entries exist in the evil beings list, I will get to that later if no one does. AdamDobay 08:32, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • When we're done with moving character bios to their respective pages, should the DVD information be split off too? It seems a bit large as well. AdamDobay 12:11, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I've compressed the DVD information from the current long list, into a much more readable (and more compressed) table format. I think that in this format it should be okay to stay on the main page, as it doesn't take up that much room and is useful as part of the overview of the show. Maelwys 15:44, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Looks great. Thanks. Another question: While I'm sure minor characters should get packed into one entry, but I don't know, should characters like Leo, Darryl, Cole, Andy, Dan and Jenny, Chris and Billie be put in one entry (like a List of Charmed supporting characters) or should they each have their own entries? AdamDobay 17:17, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm thinking that for the main page, we should have a section on "Main Cast" that includes a couple lines on each of the 4 sisters, with links to each character and actor page. Then a section on "Supporting Cast" that includes the same thing for those you listed above (with each of them getting their own detail page... most of them are major enough characters to deserve it, and most already have one). The section currently below that (Recurring Guest Roles) should be removed completely to a different page, same way that the evil characters were. Maelwys 17:25, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I've created a new link template to include at the bottom of Charmed pages, allowing us to cross-link them much more easily. You can add it the other pages with {{Charmed}}. I've replaced the previous "See Also" section with the template on the main page. I'd also consider removing the Enemies and Locations sections, so we don't end up with a whole lot of "See this link" sections in the finished product... what do you think of doing that? Maelwys 14:48, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I've now added the template to all the major pages (those linked from the template). In doing so I also noticed that there was some discrepency among the categories of the various pages, so I've started to clean those up to (and will continue to do so). In examining the categories, I also noticed that there's some overlap between articles (one thing leads to another, doesn't it? hehe). For example: Darklighters (Charmed) and Darklighter. Also Chris Perry and Chris Halliwell. I vote the Darklighters be merged into the first article (which is what I linked the template to). For the Chris articles... I'm not sure which way makes more sense (since we knew him first as Perry, but more properly his name is Halliwell). Any suggestions? Maelwys 15:12, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
  • New thing to do: Could somebody write up something for the Charmed Ones entry? Right now it just redirects back to the Charmed main page, but I think it could be worthwhile to put something there, explaining the significance of the name, their joint place in history, etc (with links to the 4 individuals of course, not too much personal information on them seperately, just about them together). Maelwys 15:37, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
  • On a related note, we could also use a summary article for Demons (Charmed). We've got one for White and Darklighters, Avatars and Elder, just missing anything on Demons. Maelwys 16:00, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I've just finished doing a complete rewrite/reformat of [[Prudence Halliwell|Prue]'s page. I figured it'd be the shortest, and least likely to change from this point forward, so made a good test bed. ;-) If anybody could let me know what they think of the new format, it'd be great. I figured breaking down their lives into Romantic, Professional, and Charmed categories made the most sense, since those are the three things that they're always trying hard to juggle between. If it goes over well, I'll work on converting the other 3 into the same setup, instead of the ugly point form we've got now. Also, I included into Prue's page all the information currently contained on the main Charmed page, so once we're ready to shrink that it can be deleted from the main page without any other copying. I just figured it'd look silly to have only her entry shrink, when the other 3 aren't ready yet. Maelwys 22:39, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
The three categories were a great idea, Maelwys, I greatly approve of it. More in the article's discussion itself.
  • I'm a novice Wiki guy and was wondering if someone more experienced than myself could help me out with a Charmed matter. It seems that there are two Darklighter pages. The more proper page is Darklighters (Charmed) and the less developed page is Darklighter. Is there any way someone can somehow have a re-direct feature on the Darklighter page to automatically go toward the Darklighters (Charmed) page? Any help offered would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Artemisboy 22:36, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Longest running female-lead show?

I've heard the version that Charmed is now the longest running female-lead show, but is it really? It now surpasses Laverne and Shirley in no. of episodes, but I've heard counterarguments that Murder She Wrote is the longest-running female lead show because it ran for several more years than any of these. Any ideas on how this is calculated? AdamDobay 01:36, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Recent interview with show exec. producer Brad Kern in TVGuide [1], the question is cleared up. As Kern put it, I kept pressing the publicity people, saying, "Are we sure we're right about this?" because wasn't Murder, She Wrote on for, like, 12 years? They said, "No, no, this is for female leads, plural." AdamDobay 09:23, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Credits Section

Do we really need a complete listing of the fine print closing credits on the main page? It seems to take up a lot of space, and any of the information there that people would actually find useful is already included elsewhere on the page. Maelwys 20:05, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

One: It seems to be a direct copy from somewhere. Two: completely unnecessary. This is a page for general information. Who wants to know the second assistant make-up artist can look it up on IMDB, and what Spelling Entertainment is can be gotten from its own article. AdamDobay 20:12, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Photos

Do all the supporting cast really need photos on the main page? Wouldn't photo's in their individual articles be enough? Plus the photo of the actor playing Dan Gordon that's up at the time I'm writing this bears no resemblance to the character, I don't think, so it's just a shot of the actor, not the actor as the character Sadisticality 15:08, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, Dan's picture should definitely be changed to one of the character (and Cole's too now that we're at that). But otherwise, I'm pro for attaching pictures to the characters, that gives a little flavour for the raw text, although I still agree these are too large. AdamDobay 16:49, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Rumours uprise

Considering the amount of rumours appearing on the internet regarding Charmed, an uprise in rumour inclusion in the article can be expected in the following weeks and months. I'll just quickly include some of the rumours here, each of which is either based on obscure, ambiguous statements from cast and crew members, or just simply based on fan speculation.

  • Alyssa Milano will not appear in Season 9 (based on a recent Charmed Magazine interview she had said she wanted a break after Charmed -- but didn't state whether she would leave)
  • Rose McGowan will not appear in Season 9 (in an interview she said she is contracted for eight years)
  • Charmed is not getting a Season 9 (speculations from dropping ratings, budget cuts or the above rumours)
  • Charmed is getting a Season 9 (speculations based on David Janollari, WB president of entertainment saying something along the lines of Charmed possibly having the legs to run a bit more)

Nothing has officially been announced, so if any of the rumours above pop up, even if in a manner that looks to have background, feel free to delete it. It was hinted by Janollari (so this is also a rumour :) that we will not know about the show's future until around May. AdamDobay 09:20, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't see why Dan and Cole shouldn't have pictures up, they were/are a big part of the show. Also, the show runs in syndication with all of the old episodes, so to many people, they are still on the show.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/h/a/Talk%7ECharmed_Archive_3_f78e.html"