Talk:List of Heroes episodes/Archive 1

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.

Contents

Multiple Versions of Episodes

Are multiple versions of episodes airing? Some of these descriptions contain events that did not appear in the version I saw.

No idea, but the descriptions I see are of the shows I saw.--Kranar drogin 10:37, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
It could be that the Canadian version is different from the American version, it could be that you are referring to the first airing of the pilot compared to subsequent version (which were trimmed in length for commercial breaks,) and it's possible that the Sci-Fi channel's version in the US is slightly different then the NBC version in the US (also due to commercial breaks.) --DJ Chair 13:31, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Episode Titles

The Sci-Fi Channel schedule lists the 7th episode as "Nothing to Hide," not "Nothing to Lose." Also, the following episode is listed as "Seven Minutes to Midnight."--MythicFox 08:33, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

"Seven Minutes to Midnight" is a reference to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists' "Doomsday Clock," which currently stands at seven minutes to midnight. --198.82.102.237 21:08, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I support what was stated above. There are multiple versions at least of the first episode. I have on my HDD two versions of episode 1 with significant differences (story, not just length)--Energman 21:33, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Links to Episodes

Shouldn't we follow some type of naming convention here? I mean, what seems to make the most sense is to place the name of the episode, and then the name of the series. Having Hiros listed as just Hiros is going to follow some people up. --DJ Chair 21:10, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

That does not "make the most sense". Naming conventions of Wikipedia are about clarity, disambiguation and accuracy. No other articles for "Hiros" eliminates the need for disambiguation. Clarity is achieved by naming the episode properly. Accuracy over rules the supposed benefits of adding "Heroes episode" to the end of every article title. "Hiroes" is accurate. "Genesis (Heroes episode)" is not, but forgetable. Honestly... Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 22:33, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Consistency seems to be the best approach and so appending (Heroes episode) seems logical. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 22:36, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Thank you DJ Chair! I totally agree with you. We have been having a discussion over at Hiros exactly about that. I think Clarity is HELPED, not hindered by (Heroes episode) after the title. I'd be okay with (Heroes) as well, as it helps immediately clarify that its part of a TV series. EnsRedShirt 22:39, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I also agree. --Kmsiever 16:54, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree with EnsRedShirt. --Elonka 03:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Well, that was random and...uh..."late". I wonder what brough this on... Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 08:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Standard

According to here if there is no disambiguation needed then the series name need not be included. That said most shows now include the series name by default for two reasons; one it makes it standard across the board and two it prevents future disambiguation issues. So the format I would recomend we use is <Episode Title>_(Heroes) on every episode for consistancy and to prevent potential future issues. -- Argash  |  talk  |  contribs  05:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

So, go against project guidelines for pointless, POV, pre-emptive reasons? Unnecessary. I won't have any part in that. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 05:27, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
In this case the project guidelines are wrong, short sighted, and need a change. It makes no sense why you are so against these being formated similarly so we can keep a constant look across all related articles. EnsRedShirt 05:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Because it's not necessary. Plus, things don't generally conform to "universal format". Not every comics-related article has "(comics)" at the end of it. Not every DC, Marvel, et cetera property has their at the end of their article. Why should every episode of a TV show have "([series] episode)" at the end of it? Because you say so? No. "Hiros" is the first use of that name. Seven Minutes to Midnight will be the first use of that one. And that reminds me, adding that extra "Heroes episode" will be a bitch with longer episode titles. Honestly, open your mind. I've considered your POVs and the only benefits of your "system" are, as I stated above, pointless, biased, against policy or a combination thereof. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 05:47, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
I am sorry that creating a better looking, easier to read Encyclopedia creates a little more work.. (yea those extra 9 key strokes are killers.) EnsRedShirt 05:59, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Actually only (Heroes) would be appended not (Heroes episode) -- Argash  |  talk  |  contribs  06:05, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I've Posted an RfC

The RfC has been posted, since the issue has come up for Jericho, Heroes and Lost (probably others as well) I have put in a singly topic which you can read and discuss here -- Argash  |  talk  |  contribs  | Status:On 14:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, it's worth getting as much participation in this discussion as possible. All interested editors are invited to come in and participate in the poll. --Elonka 23:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Length of the "Short" descriptions

I'm wondering if the "short" descriptions aren't a bit to long. The standard for most shows is one to 3 lines while these seem too average around 6 lines. -- Argash  |  talk  |  contribs  | Status:On 06:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I honestly think it doesn't matter. Depending on the depth of a show and how many storylines are exploited a summary can vary in size. I mean hardly anything happens in an episode of LOST but a lot happens in an episode of Galactica for example.

Spoiler Warning

Since the episode synopses here are (so far) the word-for-word one that NBC gives out weeks before an episode air, they don't quite qualify as spoilers to my way of thinking. For me, a spoiler is the revelation of a surprise plot twist or a story's ending, and putting the warning at the beginning of every plot synopis or description ruins the point of having a warning in the first place, which is allow people to find out what the story but giving them an opportunity to skip over the biggest surprises. In any case, does anyone object to having the spoiler warning removed here? Primogen 01:38, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Accuracy of episode descriptions

The episode descriptions, which currently are based on the synopses provided by NBC, are nevertheless inaccurrate. It looks like some describe plot points from near the end of previous episodes that aren't really dealt with in the current episode. Since NBC was trying to avoid giving spoilers before the episode air, the descriptions are also a bit coy for an encylopedia. If someone has the time and ambition, could they check these for accuracy against the episode articles? Primogen 23:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Plot synopsis length in episode articles

See also: Talk:Six_Months_Ago#please.2C_don.27t_delete_the_entire_thing.

Many of the plot descriptions throughout the various Heroes episode articles are 2-3,000 words long. I think plot descriptions that go down to the shot and dialog level are too long for an encyclopedia. By comparison, I checked the plot descriptions from one episode article each from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Lost, and Battlestar Glactica, and they were all about 1,000 words long, which feels about right to me for a Heroes episode article. So, I'm throwing this out to the Heroes editor community, in case anyone agrees and feels ambitious while there is a break until the next new episode. Primogen 21:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Like i said in the Six Months Ago talk page, you cannot just delete the entire summary and leave three meaningless paragraphs. That does not help to explain what the episode is about. If you wish to shorten the summaries, do so my condensing it, but still leave the neccasary details in there. I think around the look for Fallout seems reasonable. If Primogen is right and it's 2,000 words then so be it. I think it's way better to write more than to not do our jobs and write nothing. dposse 21:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Am I the only one who believes a nice decent sized summary is a good thing?!? - I mean come on now.. we are building an encyclopaedia.. we should not have artificial limits. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771
I'm neither suggesting to hacking the summaries in a haphazard way nor to set an artificial limit at a precise word count. I'm suggesting that the episode descriptions are currently much too wordy and detailed for the purpose of describing the plot, and in looking at other examples on Wikipedia, I think that writing about the plot at more of a "scene resolution level" rather than attempting to do a shot-by-shot description would produce a "nice decent sized summary." Primogen 22:09, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
I would suggest: 1) keep the verbose plot descriptions and 2) write a quick plot overview ("synopsis") to accompany (1). This way you get "oh, it's that episode" and you can find the nitty gritty details. Looking at Six Months Ago (and no others thus far) that the verbose plot also be broken down with more headings. Cburnett 00:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Very nice compromise, Cburnett! I like it. dposse 02:29, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Sources for episode titles

What are the sources for the titles of 112, 113, and 114? --Milo H Minderbinder 20:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, the first two are consistently used by most sites. TV.com, however mentions, Nothing to Lose as "Prod 115". Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 20:51, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

NBC & Netflix offer special 11-episode recap DVD

Zap2It.com wrote a story on NBC & Netflix teaming up to offer a special DVD which recaps the first half of the season, as well as previews of two new NBC shows. I think it's based on this press release. Should this information appear in this article or the main article? The story also mentions NBC is showing a one-hour catch-up episode prior to the new episode on January 22. Does anyone see a new episode title floating out there so we can add it to the episode list? fmmarianicolon | Talk 19:18, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't see how any of this in important, let alone encyclopedic. "Relevant"? Maybe. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 21:52, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
That looks like good info to me. Most TV show main pages have DVD sections, you could do something like The_4400#DVD_releases. - Peregrine Fisher 22:41, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
It's not really a traditional DVD release, more of a recap. It's like...a homemade tape. You guys can do what you want, but it doesn't seem like something to put in the 'pedia. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 22:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Summaries have been copied from other sites

It looks to me like some or all of these summaries have been copied from other sites such as tv.com. Check out these google searches: [1] [2]. Should we remove them all, or can someone determine some of them are OK? - Peregrine Fisher 04:37, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Check it yourself. These summaries are all widely released and circulated, from what I understand. I doubt TV.com wrote them, let alone copyrighted them. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 05:01, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
No excuse to copy the material. Material is by default copyrighted so without a statement of release as public domain or copyleft then it can only be assumed that it is owned by someone and wikipedia doesn't have rights to it. Summaries found to be copies should be blanked and written anew. Cburnett 05:25, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
I replaced them all with stub summaries. - Peregrine Fisher 19:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Matthew, please restore the production codes - NBC uses those numbers on their Heroes episode pages. --Ckatzchatspy 19:18, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[3] - I don't see anything saying production code ... :-\ thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 19:25, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Check out the URL you just posted - "http://www.nbc.com/Heroes/episodes/season1/101/". Each episode is under a respective "101, "102", etc. --Ckatzchatspy 19:30, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
That's a directory, and it means nothing, it could just as easily mean: season1episode01. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 19:34, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Side note: Does it actually add anything to the article either way? Production codes might be useful if episodes were aired wrongly for example, however in this case it just seems trivial (WP:AVTRIV) and if cited would it not be better on the episode page? thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 19:34, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

(reset indent) I should have mentioned it here, but I removed all the copy vios and replaced them. That's why the summaries are so small and crappy. Here was the edit. - Peregrine Fisher 02:44, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

The summaries should be longer or the way it was before some one changed them into short summaries. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.242.200.48 (talk • contribs) on 04:35, January 29, 2007 (UTC); Please sign your posts!

They can't be the way they were since those were copyright violations. Feel free to write longer ones, we're all editors here. --Milo H Minderbinder 14:08, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Reverting summaries

Why are you reverting the summaries Ace Class Shadow? Have you read the Images section above? - Peregrine Fisher 00:01, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

For future reference, work on the punctuation. Also, this talk page is best used to address the article and all of its editors as whole. Still, since you asked so nicely, I'll tell you. Several the attempted expansions utilizing poor grammar, spelling and—wait for it...!—punctuation. I try to correct what I can, and I'll gladly leave any good contributions alone. However, when someone, intentionally or otherwise, damages the quality of the article, I feel obligated to do something. Maybe you'd rather have large content over quality, but that's not what makes a good article. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 00:12, 1 February 2007 (UTC)