Talk:List of Red Dwarf episodes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of Red Dwarf episodes article.

Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Peer review List of Red Dwarf episodes has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Contents

[edit] Renaming

All other episode guides for TV shows live at List of XXX episodes. This should probably be moved for consistency; I'll move it in a week if there are no objections. Kinitawowi 10:17, Nov 1, 2004 (UTC)

Well, nobody said anything so it's done. Kinitawowi 14:32, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Cleaned this thing up

I went through and took out MANY superfluous commas, some personal comments, and ALL the damn elipses (...).

With the spoiler alert at top, this should really be an episode list, not a TV Guide preview with sentences ending with "...but a surprising twist is in store for the crew..."

Almost every episode ended with an elipse, so those are gone. I also fleshed out more of the episodes in Season 1-6.

Anyone who disagrees, feel free to comment. 159.121.130.84 12:33, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] My Theory for the Out Of Time episode

If Rimmer destroyed the Time Drive just before the missile hit the Starbug, wouldn't the missile along with the future crew have disappeared and the present crew saved? --OrtonFan2006 11:29, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Isn't that what we're led to believe happened? I thought that was kinda the point.
Hmm... I'll look on this. OrtonFan2006 12:04, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Watch the first monologue from Lister in Series VII. It'll all be come clear. And even if it doesn't, who gives a smeg? Andymarczak 10:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
No, what happens is that the present ship is destroyed, thus destroying the Time Drive, thus destroying the future crew, thus saving the present crew. Thus there are too many thuses here.

[edit] Created a lot of episode articles

Amazed they weren't already on here, but hopefully they're a good starting point for others to flesh out.Lugnuts 12:21, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm also going to rework the main page, to take out the programme synopsis as they are mainly duplicated in the individual entries. Now would anyone like any toast...? Lugnuts 17:41, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
And now added seperate entries for each Back In The Red article (as per the Pete ones). Please feel free to populate with plot summaries, guest cast, etc. Lugnuts 13:47, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New list using template

I have remade this list using the episode list template. I've used the colours of the dvds of each series. I've also written short descriptions for all but the last series and uploaded more screenshots. --Moochocoogle 20:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of summaries and images

A bunch of the summaries were copied from other web sites, which is a big no-no. For example: [1], [2], [3]. I think a few of these may have not been copied, so if some one wants to check them one by one and readd any that we actually wrote, that would be great. Seasons 7 and 8 looked pretty good, but someone should check if any of those eps were copied too. Also, for Wikipedia:Fair use reasons, we cannot have images without summaries, so add the images back after the summaries, not before. It may seem like I'm destroying this page, but actually this is the first step to making a really good page. - Peregrine Fisher 03:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I think your edits require two hours W.O.O. Or at least a serving of sprout soup...! ;-) Lugnuts 06:58, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Not sure what you mean. - Peregrine Fisher 07:04, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
      • With. Out. Oxygen. And he's right. Did you actually look at those Google results? Every single one of them is an article forked from Wikipedia (there's excerpts of text from the main Red Dwarf page as well - are you going to delete that too?), not the other way round. I've reverted the changes. Kinitawowi 07:58, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Looking at the edit history, much of these texts seem to be the work of User:Jimd. I suggest we ask him about it. I have to admit that the lines seem a bit "too" clean for my taste. It feels like they were taken from a DVD booklet or something. However, I also agree that the google results do not directly support a copyright violation claim. --TheDJ (talkcontribsWikiProject Television) 09:43, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, another user told me the page was full of copyrights, and when I checked, I didn't realize those other siters were wikipedia mirrors. - Peregrine Fisher 15:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Single episodes

I plan on redirecting these per WP:EPISODE soon. Information from multiple secondary sources must be present for a single episode to need an article. This includes reception and development. Single plot summaries and trivia don't make a substantial article. I suggest Wikia and tv.com as alternate venues for this information. TTN 17:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Maybe hold back on that just yet and give these pages a chance to become better first. Lugnuts 18:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Most of these seem to have existed for around six months to a year, and they're of no quality. Unless you have actual sources at your disposal, and you are able to take the time to improve them, don't claim that it can happen. TTN 18:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Judging from your talk page you've already started digging. Oh well, it's your funeral. Lugnuts 18:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
People disagree with me, big whoop. They can only use false arguments most of the time anyways. TTN 18:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
You've not presented your argument with a supporting policy/guideline... do that and you may get some support. Matthew 19:10, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
WP:EPISODE, WP:FICT, and WP:WAF are all applicable to this. You seem to be the only one who continues to ignore them after they have been explained. TTN 19:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
That's not true, TTN, and you know it. Many others have objected to your actions, and in particular the manner in which it is being done. Wikia and TV.com are not viable alternatives - they have completely diffrent philosophies and approaches toward the material. Consider this my formal objection to your announced move here. You are expected - as is any Wikipedian - to discuss this matter, rather than just butchering an entire collection of articles. --Ckatzchatspy 02:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Then by all means discuss it. There have to be at least two people to discuss (unless I'm crazy). First matter of business, where are the sources? TTN 02:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)