Talk:The Earth King

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

TV
Television Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Television, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to television programs and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has been rated as Redirect-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-Importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by the Avatar: The Last Airbender task force. (rated as Low importance)

Contents

[edit] Deletion

I personally think this article should be deleted, as we don't know anything about it other than the title.

I agree. It has no sources and is probably nothing but speculation. However, if the title is indeed confirmed, it should stay, as information can simply be added later. (124.121.96.204 16:47, 12 October 2006 (UTC))

I agree too. Wikipedia is not a place for original research. Stretchyrubberbands 14:09, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

This has a soruce of Tv.com but some users argue that it is not a reliable source which is why the no source tag is up. -Dylan0513 00:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm usually pretty good to trust that site, but as of City of Walls and Secrets, which they had labled as "Secrets of Ba Sing Se", I'm not sure anymore. 208.122.69.76 14:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)Arowen Half-Elven

[edit] Date

I THINK WE SHOULD LET THE PEOPLE WHO ACTULLY KEPT UP TO DATE WITH SHOW SHOWS... tHE WIKIPEDIA ADMINS DONT KNOW ANYTHING..--AVATAR_KYOSHI 13:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

And here we go again with Tv.com. Tv.com has the Earth King date up as November 3rd. I agree with Tv.com's avatar page and will almost always agree with it. I state again that it has never been wrong, but is also a reliable source. We could always wait until Thursday for Comcast/TvGuide to confirm this. -Dylan0513 00:40, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, let's read this. To quote directly from that section:
“ Posts to bulletin boards, Usenet, and wikis, or messages left on blogs, should not be used as sources. This is in part because we have no way of knowing who has written or posted them, and in part because there is no editorial oversight or third-party fact-checking. In addition, in the case of wikis, the content of an article could change at any moment. For exceptions, see the section on self-published sources.
The same reasoning applies to trivia on sites such as IMDb or FunTrivia.com, where the degree of editorial oversight is unknown. However, film credits on IMDb are provided directly by the Writer's Guild of America and can be considered reliable.
 ”

The "editor" on TV.com is nothing but "some guy". We don't even know any more than a screen name. He is not, to quote the next section of the page I linked, a "well-known, professional researcher writing within [his] field of expertise". He's just "some guy", purported to know somebody at Nickelodeon. Even if it has "never been wrong" that doesn’t matter, as I explained before. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 18:12, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok. But the guy sitting there at TvGuide updating their listings is still some guy, just having got the information from Nick. I know it's not the same, but still. -Dylan0513 19:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

The difference is, TV Guide has professional editors. TV.com has an anonymous editor. That's the key, editoral oversight.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 19:52, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but isn't the source more important than the guy who looks at it and puts it up. Pooldude has a guy from Avatar giving him this and the Tv schedules have Viacom. Ultimitly it's the same thing but at a different speed. The Nick November Highlights should come out soon enough which should hopefully have Friday night highlights confirming all of this and giving us more details. -Dylan0513 19:57, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Thing is, Viacom officially publishes that information to journalistic entities. That's entirely different from Pooldude getting it from some unnamed person. One is an official publication, the other is a leak.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I got it. We'll either get the date and summary for The Earth King Thursday on the Comcast listings (which I figured out are the TvGuide listing just put up eariler) or from the Novemer highlights if they come out first. -Dylan0513 20:09, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

TvGuide.com has the Earth King and it's summary and date(The dates are 1 late) up and confirmed early. -Dylan0513 19:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Definetly a weird summary... should make for an interesting episode. That isn't a copy and paste summary is it Dylan? H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 20:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

It is a strange summary and it was copied and pasted from TvGuide.com. Very general summary too. I wouldn't be surprised if when Nick's summary comes out it's more specific. -Dylan0513 20:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Its up now if you look ahead to the third and the forth. (Their dates are all messed up: they have Saturday the forth listed as the third.) Its not any more descriptive. "The kids battle Long Feng the Dai Li when they attempt to show the Earth King the vast conspiracy taking place in his city. Zuko becomes seriously ill and has feverish dreams as he faces a spiritual crisis." That's how it appears on nick.com as well.--TriPredRavage 05:01, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

The Nick schedule is messed up and they obviously won't air one episode before another, stop editing it until we know what is going on. -Dylan0513 21:18, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not touching this one. I don't want to be the one responsible for putting up wrong info. However, I am going to do what I can to help you guys out, even if it's not much. Hopefully this whole thing gets settled soon.--TriPredRavage 02:32, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

For those of you who didnt' see it, I just saw a comerical for a new episode, so it wil be this friday. Momoroxmysoxoff 20:47, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Me too, just saying. Xenero 04:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I THINK WE SHOULD LET THE PEOPLE WHO ACTULLY KEPT UP TO DATE WITH SHOW SHOWS... tHE WIKIPEDIA ADMINS DONT KNOW ANYTHING..--AVATAR_KYOSHI 13:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reminder about excessive links.

Remember, chances are the reader knows what the word ill is, so only link the words which the reader may want to read about later, or simply doesn't know about (Zuko, Ba-Sing-Se, etc) Abby724 00:43, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Only one mention of Zuko in here...

Someone needs to put in the article about Zuko, his illness, and about the part when Irof revealed to him it was caused by his decision in Lake Laogai; that his conscience is fighting itself. Abby724 01:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

The episode just aired. Those summaries are very early versions and the plot synopsis will be worked on over time. -Dylan0513 01:42, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] about sokkas club

Ok ill try to put it better, from what i saw Sokka did not have his ball club the only weapon i saw that even looked like it was his machete but i may be wrong since the episode is not that fresh in my mind i know that ill try to check on the rerun, but the only shot i am not sure about is the first shot of him armed once he hops off appa but that scene goes by too fast and there was alot of distance but in every other scene i remeber seeing the edge of his machete or the hook on the tip, am not too sure what his other weapon is if he had another but if someone else can check on it as well since i am not sure if ill get up early enough NekrosKoma 07:22, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't see the blue ball club weapon. So I think he doesn't have it. 81.71.83.96 15:27, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
No, he had it when they were invading the palace. That note is right. -Dylan0513 15:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
he had it in the first few scenes with his machete but as soon as he gets into the earth kings throne room he only has his machete the problem is the camera is rarely on him so its only in on scene that you can see it in better detail, but its only for a split second so you got to be fast to see it NekrosKoma 16:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Hooray for animation errors! Anyway, you can see the club for a good amount of time in the invasion scene. Whydoit (Strangle Me for My Mistakes) 08:55, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Whos to say he didnt pick it off the ground after they discarded it?72.230.63.44 07:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Because they had gone far, far away from where Sokka was, and the gang had no idea where it was they'd gone to. JBK405 20:34, 12 November 2007 (UTC) But whos to say that the Gaang didnt Find that place and he Picked it up off the ground? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.230.63.44 (talk) 08:36, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Since we acually saw them at that point (They got their sand-sailor there) and they didn't pick up anything but the ship. Also, even if they had, it'd still be a continuity goof in this episode because the club appears and disappears between "camera" changes. JBK405 16:41, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Beginning Summary

I'm new at this, so I was wondering if the beginning summary should be changed. This line "The kids battle Long Feng and the Dai Li when they attempt to show the Earth King the vast conspiracy taking place in his city," I believe is innaccurate because they actually don't fight the Dai Li or Long Feng in this epiosode. They only fight the palace guards. I guess you could say they had a diplomatic struggle with Long Feng, but not a battle. Auge 00:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The summaries are official either by Nick or TvGuide. They will not be changed unless very inaccurate. And they do fight the Dai Lee, even if the people who they were fighting weren't (They were), then they were fighting them indirectly. -Dylan0513 01:51, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I can see how your point would have value in other summaries, but in your own words "they will not be changed unless very inaccurate," the summary should be changed. A fight between the Dai Li never happened. I played it over and over to make sure I wasn't crazy. Although they had a diplomatic struggle with the Dai Li, the only fight occured between the palace guards and the gang. I know I might be accused of arguing semantics. But to put it in context, it would be as if a newspaper made the mistake of saying some rebels were fighting the KGB instead of the Russian army. I would be satisfied with a disclaimer that explained that even though this is the official summary it has been deemed inaccurate.Auge 03:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the episode synopsis should be enough to let them figure it out for themselves. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 05:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Water Tribe Warrior's Location

Did the show give the location of Hakoda, Bato, and the other Water Tribe warriors? I remember Chameleon Bay from somewhere.... Kochdude388 00:50, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

They announced it at the end of the episode, from documents taken from Long Feng's office. JBK405 01:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Earth King, Long Feng brain washed our friend!"

Why didn't they (Aang) also mentioned that he (Leng Feng) killed him (Jet)? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.107.220.172 (talk) 19:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC).

No one, not even the characters knew he was dead until it was announced. They may have thought the worse, but to throw around uncertain accusations like that would certainly have gotten them thrown out. Also, I think that they may not have said it out loud (and I've heard that they will never say it on the show) because Nickelodeon won't allow it. By putting the announcement on the internet, that will prevent a large aprt of the younger viewers from seeing it. And the young ones will forget him anyway. ɱўɭĩєWhat did I dowrong 19:34, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Earth King is Fab.jpg

Image:Earth King is Fab.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 05:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Remainderofdrill.jpg

Image:Remainderofdrill.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 (talk) 20:24, 26 November 2007 (UTC)