Talk:Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season Eight

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This Buffyverse-related article is part of WikiProject Buffyverse, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Buffy, Angel & the rest of the Buffyverse. You can help! Visit the project page, episode checklist or discuss an article at the project talk-page.
Buffy Portal
WikiProject Comics
comics
Portal
This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Help with current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project talk page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Please explain the rating here.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Number of issues

Is it known how many issues will be published? Theshibboleth 03:35, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

According to this, upwards of 25. --Nalvage 21:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Third Buffy

Surely the one that is "underground, literally" is actually dead. Otherwise, exactly how is she working as a decoy?

Oh! I assumed that meant she was like, doing underworld work or something, but I suppose that makes much more sense! "Underground" in Charmed was almost always used to refer to demonland. Heh. ~ZytheTalk to me! 22:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
I just assumed she meant... in caves? Tunnels? Super-Spelunking Decoy-Buffy? --Nalvage 13:17, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
I too thought she was underground as in like...hiding. I didn't take it as dead. - Fallingx

Given the fates of Hitler and Saddam Hussein, I think most people would see the likelihood of Buffy working in a bunker. Plus, if there 'are/is' rather than 'were/was' a third Buffy, it points toward her being alive, otherwise she would have mentioned her in a different context.

Just my opinion.

AdZ 11:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

It is more than clear that "underground" means "dead". She's six feet under, and that's all. Otherwise, Buff' wouldn't have said "litterally".

Well, we now know that's not true. -- Noneofyourbusiness (talk) 19:10, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] When does this series debut?

There's nothing in the article stating when the first issue comes out. Any info on release date? Has it already started? - Pennyforth 18:44, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

First issue is out on March the 7th. I've added the info. --Nalvage 18:57, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Much appreciated. - Pennyforth 19:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Buffyverse chronology

If this is Season eight in the chronology then that means it runs concurrently with Angel Season 5 right?--NeilEvans 22:29, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Joss has been vague, but he says it's at least a year and a half after Buffy season seven. --Nalvage 22:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
At least, making it on par with a hypothetical Angel season six or seven. I believe the Angel IDW books are in that status where they're canon until if ever Joss decides to retcon them, so I believe they count as what happens concurrently with Bs8.~ZytheTalk to me! 23:51, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] characters

Should character information be added to existing pages or should new ones be made.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.201.200.18 (talk • contribs)

We're discussing this at WT:BUFFY, please lend your opinions.~ZytheTalk to me! 15:07, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Plot Details

Are we sure that Anya will appear in the comic? The comments made through IGN seemed to be made in sarcasm, and unless more evidence exists I suggest removing them, or at least making it clear Joss may have been joking. --Markydavo 18:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Several interviews said Anya was appearing. My personal theory is she could be the Big Bad.~ZytheTalk to me! 19:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

It says in the article that one subplot deals with Dawn's loss of virginity, but that is not a proven fact, yet. We do not know if that is what caused her "giant" problem. Buffy suggested this, but Xander also made another suggestion. Perhaps it should be changed to something like "One subplot deals with the reltionship between Dawn and Buffy" or something, but I think it currently is misleading and inaccurate until stated as fact in the comic itself. Stetsonblade 14:39, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Buffy says so in #1 (shortly before "since when was Willow the expert on boys anyway", and Joss says so in the various interviews.~ZytheTalk to me! 15:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
No no you're taking it out of context. Buffy says, "OHH! I just know Dawn had sex with that Kenny and won't say anything to me--but she'll tell willow, fine, her first time and it all goes wrong which I'm totally well versed in and anyhow willow's the expert on boys since when now?" Buffy is only assuming that Dawn lost her virginity to Kenny. She doesn't know for sure. In the second comic, Xander suggests that Dawn has somehow done this to herself. We don't know which is true. So, I don't think it is accurate to say that without some citation or article where Joss clearly states that this is the reason and not just a possible reason.Stetsonblade 17:19, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Doesn't the solicitation say "Dawn experiences problems of ginormic proportions as a byproduct of losing her virginity." It's in the history from before the issue was released, where every plot point as cited.~ZytheTalk to me! 19:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
The issue is it's NOT something currently simply revealed by reading the material. As such if you want to keep it up, you need to referance where Joss Whedon or someone else stated that was the case, or some other source. If it cannot be internally verified yet {and being hinted at even as a strong possability does not count} in the source itself {the comic} you've got to say where you're getting your info from otherwise it's original research and not allowable. I'm not saying your wrong, I'm just saying it needs a link to the sources you mention IN the article. OR wait till it's actually stated within the comic directly.

[edit] Move?

The official name of the series is "Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season Eight" according to the official info in small print inside the front cover. Season Eight is not an unofficial name. Should this be moved to the correct capitalization? Also in the intro it should probably include the full title in bold. Anyone disagree? -- Siradia 04:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I was thinking that, and it even refers to season seven as "Season Seven." Go ahead and move the page if you want.~ZytheTalk to me! 12:36, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
OK. I moved it. Woo-hoo! My first page move! I see you've taken care of the intro already. -- Siradia 16:25, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiquote article?

A little earlier to worry about it, to be sure, but does anyone feel that, since the series is canon, it warrants a Wikiquote page as the original series did? And, if so, would it be better as a seperate article or as an extension of the existing one(s)?

AdZ 17:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Number of expected issues

So, we have two conflicting reports from recent interviews which are included in the article. Scott Allie saying it's almost up to 50, then Joss saying it could be as many as 25. I notice the Joss interview is actually less serious than even the typically whimsical Joss interview. The actual quote is, "It started out as twenty-five. But now it's blown up so big, I have so many ideas, so many awesome writers scrambling to get in the game, I think it could go as many as twenty-five." It seems very self contradictory. I'm thinking it's either a misprint or an odd attempt at humor. Not sure which. I really can't imagine it's serious though. -- Siradia 04:55, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

It's definitely a joke. It's just I felt the entirety of our confusing information belonged in there until there was "official word".~ZytheTalk to me! 10:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Variant covers?

Is there a site anywhere that has all the covers? I'm not familiar with American comic books, is having variant covers standard practice? Example:

vol 2 cover 1: http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/2298/img5410dp8.jpg
vol 2 cover 2: http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/4992/img5403ah4.jpg

I assume the second is the "rare" one because they charge you extra for it here in Australia.

Soshesaid 15:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Having variant covers was a huge thing to do in the '90's, and in the past few years, the variant cover fad has fallen back into favor. Sometimes a variant cover can become extremely valuable while other times it is just a different picture to choose from. StarIV 20:19, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
It isn't rare. They're just giving the people who are slow on picking up the earlier issues a better chance of getting them by releasing the same issue over again, where as the comic store would be inclined to only keep the first original comic out until they got more comics and needed shelf space. It's a pretty good strategy, but don't pay extra for it the variant covers aren't any better than the original in my opinion the original covers to the first three are cooler than the newer ones. Non-ya 21:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

On a personal note, whilst I love Jeanty's internal art, I much prefer Jo Chen's covers as they allow fans of the TV show to approach it with a less "oh, it's only a comic" standpoint and draw them in. The only variant cover I've actually consciously prefered was for Superman/Batman #26. Maybe I'm just not a fan of yellow.

AdZ 16:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Story titles

I've already noted this on the No Future For You page, but the names of three of the story arcs so far, (that is, the ones that are known,) are ostensibly based on lyrics or titles of songs, all of them from the 70s. The Chain is a Fleetwood Mac song; The Long Way Home is a Supertramp song; and No Future For You is a lyric from God Save the Queen by the Sex Pistols. This raises two questions:-

1. are these links significant enough to warrant mention in their respective articles? 2. in case of The Chain, would it be prudent to add a crosslink or connect them to a disambig page?

AdZ 16:45, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

No, not enough of a pattern yet.~ZytheTalk to me! 17:00, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not canon to a lot of people

A lot of people feel this comic is NOT canon. There is a major controversy over whether it is canon or not. I think this should be noted in the article. I notice that in the Doctor Who articles when there is controversy over whether something is canon the article mentions that. I think that should be the case here. Otherwise I think the article gives the misleading impression that the comic is generally accepted as canon, where in fact its canonicity is a very debated issue. Skynowmore 20:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Cite references indicating that there is a legitimate controversy. But I find it hard to imagine that there's a meaningful one: Wheadon is in charge of the comics and explicitly considers it Season 8. — Aldaron • T/C 20:56, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I can give you so many interviews of Joss, saying that it is what happens after season 7. I have not met a fan other than you that has questioned this, if you have the comic then if you look on the inside cover, you will see that it's canon. If your still not convinced, I'll give you dozens of links about how it's true. Sorry if I come off strong, but just cause it turns from tv, to comics doesn't mean it's not canon, and we make sure we state season 8 is in comics---User:Smartjoe299

I don't know what would count as proper references. But the debate does get brought up briefly in an interview with Scott Allie of Dark Horse comics: http://www.stakesandsalvation.com/2007/05/interview-with-scott-allie.html There's a line in there "J: There has been some debate on the Internet about canon in the Buffy comics." I don't know what would count as a legitimate controversy. What I'm talking about here is the opinions of a lot of fans. Which means it's about how the Buffyverse is seen by the people most interested in it. No matter what Whedon says this will affect how people view the comic. No matter what Whedon says a significant part of the Buffy community will always view these comics as not canon. There will always be a controversy. I think such views should be noted, if not here then in Buffyverse Canon article where what's Buffy canon is discussed (it is certainly relevant to discussing what's Buffy canon). Re "I have not met a fan other than you that has questioned this", honestly I am quite amazed that you haven't met any fans that question its canonicity. I am familiar with it being questioned for months, since before the comic started coming out. Skynowmore 21:46, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Fans suck. Joss' word is gospel. Most mainstream media and commentators have described it as canon, echoing Joss' words. Otherwise, believe what you like, it ain't touching the article. ~ZytheTalk to me! 21:56, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I couldn't of said it better my self, exactly how you should put it...End of topic---Smartjoe299

Fans don't suck. Buffy would never have become so celebrated if it weren't for fans. Without fans this "Season 8" would never have been made. Without fans there would be no wikipedia Buffy project. Fans are important and their opinions count.

As for Joss's word being gospel, I think its status as "gospel" is compromised by the fact that a lot of people don't accept it as gospel (at least as regards the comics' canonicity).

The topic isn't ended, because there will always be a significant contingent of fans who don't see these comics as canon. Skynowmore 20:00, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Joss writes it; it's canon. Sorry if you don't like comics or whatever, but that's your problem. The rest of us are loving Season 8. Your quote from the Scott Allie interview is vague, the canonicity of the old Buffy comics is debatable since some are written by Mutant Enemy and some are not. Season 8 is overseen by Joss and it, like Angel Season 6 will be, is 100% canon. Paul730 14:41, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

The view that it's canon if Joss writes/oversees it is not a universally accepted view. Nor is this a matter of liking comics or not. It's a matter of whether comics can be canon for a tv show. As for "the rest of us are loving Season 8", the rest of who? I have seen a wide range of different reactions to Season 8. Some people love it, some people hate it and there's every view in between. But I don't think loving or hating it is relevant here. I hated most of season 7 but I consider it canon.

I think my quote from Scott Allie is less vague if you read the page and see it in context. Scott Allie reacts to the interviewer's remarks is if they are about the question of Season 8's canonicity. I think it is clear that the canon debate the interviewer is talking about is the Season 8 debate and that this is how Allie takes it. Skynowmore 20:00, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Also worth noting that fans argue about what is and isn't canon until they are blue in the face. Unless there was some major ipute (in which case it'd be picked up by the broader media) that needn't concern Wikipedia in most entries. I've removed a tonne of stuff from Canon (fiction) because it largely involved what fans did or didn't consider canon. A lot of that leaks over into entries I'm afriad but the bottom line is that, for example, there is no Dr Who canon. The only person who says what is or isn't canon is Joss Whedon (or his inner circle) and he says this is, see here. Without something official it is WP:OR relying on WP:RS and isn't really worthy of a mention. (Emperor 16:40, 4 July 2007 (UTC))

The reality is that a lot of people just don't accept what Whedon says as regards this being canon. They seem to feel that the rule that only the onscreen can be canon is more important than Joss saying this is canon. Skynowmore 20:00, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, let's simplify this. Whedon and Dark Horse have described the comic as canon. We have sources for this. There may be fans who disagree, but unless those fans are identifiable (ie. not anonymous or as-good-as-anonymous posters on forums), notable, and have expressed that disagreement in a source that meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, they can't be mentioned. There may be a debate over canon, but unless that debate has been referred to by a notable source, then it can't be mentioned. Having said this, there may be an argument for changing any mentions from "they're totally canon" to something more equivocal like, "Whedon has stated that the comics are canon". --Nalvage 00:56, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

"Having said this, there may be an argument for changing any mentions from "they're totally canon" to something more equivocal like, "Whedon has stated that the comics are canon"." -That sounds like a good idea. :) Skynowmore 02:17, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Btvs-faithsea8.jpg

Image:Btvs-faithsea8.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 12:04, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Buffy801-805.jpg

Image:Buffy801-805.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 14:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] standalones

I didn't know where else to ask this so I will ask it here. I know a couple of the "Buffy season 8" issue articles have been noted for deletion. I think it might make more sense if we keep the articles for the story arcs, such as "The Long Way Home (Buffy comic)", and "No Future For You (Buffy comic)", because they tend to get big. I do think though, that we should merge all the standalone issues of Buffy season 8 to one new article. So if this works, we would have an article for "The Chain", "Anywhere But Here", and "A Beautiful Sunset", all merged into one..I think that would work because standalone's don't have as much information as a 4 issue arc. What do you think? --Smartjoe299

That's bull. They have less content, but since Wikipedia focuses on out-of-universe information it is irrelevant. The articles should be rewritten to focus on real world reception such as ratings, reviews, behind-the-scenes information, conceptual history and professional criticism. For example, look at "Through the Looking Glass (Lost)" or "The Joy of Sect" and see which techniques they've used.~ZytheTalk to me! 13:54, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Zythe, you're completely right that articles should be rewritten to focus on real world reception such as ratings, reviews, behind-the-scenes information, conceptual history and professional criticism. However, the two episodes you mention both establish enough notability to deserve individual articles, receiving some sort of media attention for the content. If notability can be established for any of the comic stories (not just the one-offs) and we can come up with decent behind-the-scenes and reception info, the it deserves it's own article, but if not, I would support a merge for all of them. Currently, they're just huge plot summaries and original research.  Paul  730 17:04, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm a deluded optimist who hopes Joss will send us all DVDs in the post with his Season Eight director's commentaries on. Or, rather, hopeful he'll spill most of it in Newsarama interviews.~ZytheTalk to me! 22:08, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Lol, personally delivered DVDs? Hmm, hopefully Dark Horse will release hardcover collections, they usually have some good special features at the back. Fray had some good interviews in it which I plan to impliment when I actually sit down and read them. Special features don't really establish notablity though. These comics are uber-popular, yes? Shouldn't there be more real-world info? I see The Long Way Home (Buffy comic) has a brief reception section, that's a small step the right direction.  Paul  730 22:17, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge list of episodes with TV series

Wouldn't the reference value of the list of episodes be improved if it were merged with the list of TV episodes to form a comprehensive list of all Buffy episodes? — Aldaron • T/C 15:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that would help. The different mediums are treated very differently, "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and "Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season Eight" are two separate entities. In a sense, the comic book continuation is a spin-off.~ZytheTalk to me! 16:48, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
It's true that they are distinct, so that separate articles certainly make sense: I wouldn't merge all of this into the episodes article. But it would be useful to have a single merged episode article that spans all formats. — Aldaron • T/C 17:26, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Please don't confuse the television and comic book format - they're not episodes, they're issues. I don't think I've ever heard of a comic book being called an "episode" until Buffy Season 8 came along (maybe that's just me). What you're suggesting is a bit fancrufty - I believe they used to have a timeline or something which encompassed all Buffyverse stories, canon or not, but it got deleted. They still have "Timing" sections on episode pages, but I'm trying to see them deleted as well, because they're full of original research. I get what you're suggesting, but I just think it would be best to keep the two mediums separate. It's still a comic, even if it is canon.  Paul  730 20:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
That's a good point, but we don't have the chronology article anymore. If that were still around, there'd be no need to consider a merger, but in it's absence, the lack of some kind of list that crosses media and covers continuity is an omission. We should bring the chronology back! — Aldaron • T/C 20:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

That raises an interesting question. Was the Buffyverse chronology moved to a Wikia before AfD struck?~ZytheTalk to me! 21:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so, although it should have been. It would have been perfect for the Buffyverse wiki. It wasn't very accurate though... I remember reading it and thinking "this is all wrong". The problem with a chronology page on Wikipedia is that it's a bit in-universe. It's connecting two distinct series by the fact that they take place in the same fictional universe. Also, original research is required to piece it together if there aren't any sources (and most expanded universe stuff has a fairly vague place in continuity).  Paul  730 22:00, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Definitely. It didn't belong on Wikipedia.~ZytheTalk to me! 22:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I think we should merge the issue list to the episode list. The Season Eight comic books are canon, so it makes sense if it proceeds the season 7 episodes. Joss has said that there will be a season 9, so this is ongoing. That's a yes from me. --Redsignal 03:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with those who say they should not be merged. They reference two different projects in two different media. I would like to see them hyperlinked, though (maybe they are already and I missed it). Jwolfe 09:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
(edit conflict) It doesn't matter if it's canon or not, it's still a comic. Wikipedia doesn't deal in issues like continutity and canon, or at least it shouldn't, because writing from an in-universe perspective is against guidelines. The television series and the comic book are two distinct mediums - the season 8 comics are not episodes and are part of a different series. When the list of issues on this page become too long (it's like 50+ issues, right?) I would reccomend that it be split into a list of issues pages, but we can't confuse two distinct series just because they're set in the same fictional universe.  Paul  730 09:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A Beautiful Sunset

I know that the article got deleted due to not having enough information for a page, but as the release date is getting closer, we will surely get more information...should we remake the page? -Smartjoe299

Is an individual page really necessary? Can't any real world info/plot be covered here? "The Chain (Buffy comic)" doesn't seem to consist of much except plot and original research. We shouldn't create individual articles for the sake of it. What would be the purpose of it?  Paul  730 20:29, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

That's what I was kinda thinking,but where should we put the plot info, credits, and critism? -User:Smartjoe299

Plot can be covered in the issues table, like Angel: After the Fall, we don't need a big plot summary. Creators could be mentioned in a development section, provided there's some relevant info and it's not just a list of names. Criticism can go in the reception section.  Paul  730 13:18, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Just leaving this link to use later. Good development info!  Paul  730 22:13, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

We have a single page for a buffy episode and since these are basically episodes why can'y we have a page for this, we should re-create this page, we have a page for everyother issue, so why not this one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jay beardo (talk • contribs) 19:53, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Issue #

I'd like to include some sort of template for issue numbers on the episode pages, like with Astonishing X-Men. The issues with #s in parentheses like that would be fine I think. There are numbered issues in the cover sections, but this could clear up what's what. Some issue #s are in some infoboxes, but others are not. Include there too? Any preferred ways of doing this? Xndr (talk) 18:51, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] External Link NOT WORKING!

The external link for the preview pages of Time of Your Life leads to a comment thing. WHAT IS WRONG?! Pokemon Buffy Titan (talk) 11:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] International release dates?

There's no info about when and through what publishers the comic will be released outside the US.--86.43.64.115 (talk) 14:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

That's not typically how it works. UK distributers typically import from the US publishers.~ZytheTalk to me! 20:11, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I know very little about comics, But I'm a Buffy fan and I'm trying to find out how to get this (I can't import off the Internet or anything, I'd need to buy it in a store) I really should not use Wikipedia for this, I know, I'll have to get help with this.....thanks anyway for telling me how comic distribution works, anyway.--86.43.64.115 (talk) 15:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)